Subject | Re: Re[2]: [Firebird-general] History of Interbase's failure to make it to the big time. |
---|---|
Author | Dmitry Yemanov |
Post date | 2005-10-19T19:23:59Z |
"Dmitri Kouzmenko" <kdv@...> wrote:
http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2005/08/something-different-part-i-of-iii.html#c11
2584079541388964
Look also here:
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:12449327249131488140::NO::F4950_
P8_DISPLAYID,F4950_P8_CRITERIA:49361026453314
data/index blocks (same to our pages) which have version stamps.
Dmitry
>Tom Kyte says that Oracle v4 (1984) was their first MVCC version.
> MT> No earlier. Reading in the newsgroup, they say since v3 or v4
> MT> or it got extended MVCC since v4.
>
> what do you mean by v3 or v4?
http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2005/08/something-different-part-i-of-iii.html#c11
2584079541388964
Look also here:
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:12449327249131488140::NO::F4950_
P8_DISPLAYID,F4950_P8_CRITERIA:49361026453314
> not sure. I know that moving from v7 to v8AFAIK, Oracle doesn't have any row versioning. Their MVCC relates to
> extended database size up to 15-25% by
> metadata versioning and record versions
data/index blocks (same to our pages) which have version stamps.
> (I know that versions stored in transacion log).No, in the rollback segment.
Dmitry