4 ms·

Sorry, statements like what?

• gaius 17y ago
  Statements like "traditional X does Y but..." The "traditional" (and I don't know how you could call the latest version of any of the major databases "traditional", this is a brutally competitive market) databases don't lock just for the fun of it, but to enable features that users want. Anyone can come up with a product that doesn't do Y if it can't do X either. So what're we missing here?
  • neilc 17y ago
    I don't know how you could call the latest version of any of the major databases "traditional" Oracle has done MVCC for many years, as has Postgres. The canonical paper on optimistic concurrency control for DBs is from 1981 (http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~zives/cis650/papers/opt-cc.pdf http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~zives/cis650/papers/opt-cc.pdf). I didn't follow the rest of your comment, I'm afraid -- I was just saying that I didn't see how using append-only storage immediately makes concurrency control a non-issue. The comments from the RethinkDB guys upthread support that: not supporting concurrent writers makes your concurrency control much more straightforward.