Well, you can have a "true multi-threaded database server" without supporting transactions -- of course, it might be all this and still not be efficient. ;-) But if properly designed, with minimalistic thread locking (no "global spinlocks"!), a multithreaded RDBMS can be fairly efficient even without support transactions. However, a good transaction design would not just make it faster, it could be simpler to coordinate -- especially if data integrity is a goal -- within the database kernel, too. Of course, transaction design isn't necessarily simple -- all sorts of interesting problems with transaction isolation, dirty read support and so forth. -- Alexander Staubo http://www.mop.no/~alex/ "What the hell, he thought, you're only young once, and threw himself out of the window. That would at least keep the element of surprise on his side." --Douglas Adams, _The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_
-----Original Message----- From: itamar@porthos.maxnm.com [mailto:itamar@porthos.maxnm.com]On Behalf Of Itamar S.-T. Sent: 9. juli 1999 17:07 To: Zope-l Subject: Re: [Zope] Zope, performance and multithreading (beginner questions)
Rob Page wrote:
MySQL doesn't support transactions. Chris Petrilli here has the details but I'm led to believe this is a fatal blow to MySQL's ability to _ever_ (at least until it does support txns) reliably support threaded usage.
From the MySQL homepage: "MySQL is a true multi-user, multi-threaded SQL database server."
I don't know much about the subject, so could someone explain this seeming contradiction?
-- Itamar - itamars@ibm.net -----------------------------o-------------------------------------o Sealingwax Greeting Cards | The only good morning is a dead one | http://www.sealingwax.com/ | --Richard Stallman |
_______________________________________________ Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org http://www.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
(For developer-specific issues, use the companion list, zope-dev@zope.org - http://www.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )