The Part of PostgreSQL We Hate the Most (Multi-Version Concurrency Control)

Re:The Part of PostgreSQL We Hate the Most (Multi-Version Co... by steve_taylor on Wednesday April 26, 2023 @09:10PM (#35722020)

PostgreSQL became the internet's darling DBMS long before that. Oracle's acquisition of MySQL in 2008 made people finally take notice of PostgreSQL. Before that, most developers barely knew it existed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Part of PostgreSQL We Hate the Most (Multi-Version Co... by tuatoru on Thursday April 27, 2023 @09:56AM (#35728160)

Yeah, Postgresql was the FreeBSD of DBMSes. Solid, conceptually integral, well documented.*

I recall doing an evaluation of open source databases in 2001. MySQL didn't even have row-level locking, let alone any concept of transactions. I summarised it as "easy to use; but only for data you don't care about".

* Not that Postgres (as it was then) was without warts in 2001. A huge one was its "object orientation": table inheritance. What it needed then, and would still be nice to have, is object orientation at data type (column) level, an extension of the SQL domain.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Part of PostgreSQL We Hate the Most (Multi-Version Co... by mickeyp on Thursday April 27, 2023 @11:05AM (#35729250)

You can create types in postgresql and use them as columns... so you can have your "object" style encapsulation at a column level. So you can have a "currency" type that has both the amount and the currency.

[ Parent | on HN ]