Re: Much Ado About COUNT(*)

Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu>

From: Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh@cs.berkeley.edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jeff Davis <jdavis-pgsql@empires.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2005-01-18T22:42:32Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

    Tom> People who hang around Postgres too long tend to think that
    Tom> MVCC is the obviously correct way to do things, but much of
    Tom> the rest of the world thinks differently ;-)

It works the other way too ... people who come from the locking world
find it difficult to wrap their heads around MVCC. A big part of this
is because Gray's original paper on transaction isolation defines the
different levels based on what kind of lock acquisitions they involve. 

A very nice alternative approach to defining transaction isolation is
"Generalized isolation level definitions" by Adya, Liskov and O'Neill
that appears in ICDE 2000. 

-- 
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh