Re: oracle - mysql comparison

From: VC <boston103_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:17:26 GMT
Message-ID: <a5OKc.114138$JR4.6069@attbi_s54>

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1090216505.569999_at_yasure...
>
> I think your understanding of Oracle is rather slight based on what I
> assume you mean.

Whilst the conclusion may very well be true, your argument is unsound. Please substitute a real premis for the vague 'based on what I assume you mean'.

>
> How in mysql can you obtain a result consistent to point-in-time without
> table locking all resources.

Please go and re-read my original response to Alex Filonov who claimed that Oracle consistency is somehow more correct than that of DB2/MSSQL. We've discussed DB2/MSSQL vs. Oracle consistency issues, not mysql concurrency control.

As to mysql, the answer to your question is truly simple: MYSQL has (and has had for quite a while) an implementation of Oracle style 'read consistency' with rollback segments and all.

>
> And in Oracle ... I would like a demonstration of how would go about not
> having a point-in-time consistent result without intentionally
> corrupting a query result.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Please elaborate.

VC Received on Mon Jul 19 2004 - 06:17:26 CDT