----- Original Message -----
From: David Berg <DaveBerg@...>
To: <IB-Architect@onelist.com>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 3:59 AM
Subject: RE: [IB-Architect] Journaling support?
> From: "David Berg" <DaveBerg@...>
>
> Interbase doesn't require Journaling because of it's versioned record
> support. If the system crashes and restarts, all records marked with a
> version # corresponding to an uncommitted transaction are marked invalid
and
> thrown away as they are encountered. This allows Interbase to restart
> instantly after a crash without having to reload from a Journal, and with
no
> data integrity problems.
>
> Further, it avoids many of the locking problems that other servers have
when
> transactions hit the same area, and it guarantees 100% re-readability of
*******> data within a transaction with no performance or locking penalties.
*****
There appear to be some significant performance issues when discarded
changes are re-encountered. We have batch processes that change thousands
of records in a transaction. Roll-backs or forced restarts seem to generate
100% processor usage and lock out for other users until the garbage is
cleared. between 30 seconds and 30 minutes depending on what has happened.
I'm not wishing to scare anybody & I hope it is dues to our setup, but it
shouldbe considered. It's still the best around for roll-backs &
concurrancy in my eyes.