Sybase NNTP forums - End Of Life (EOL)

The NNTP forums from Sybase - forums.sybase.com - are now closed.

All new questions should be directed to the appropriate forum at the SAP Community Network (SCN).

Individual products have links to the respective forums on SCN, or you can go to SCN and search for your product in the search box (upper right corner) to find your specific developer center.

MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE

8 posts in Product Futures Discussion Last posting was on 2008-07-30 03:48:41.0Z
Alberto da Silva Posted on 2008-07-03 11:56:37.0Z
Sender: 5cfb.486cbd9e.1804289383@sybase.com
From: Alberto da Silva
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
X-Mailer: WebNews to Mail Gateway v1.1t
Message-ID: <486cbe75.5d10.1681692777@sybase.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
Date: 3 Jul 2008 04:56:37 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215086197 10.22.241.41 (3 Jul 2008 04:56:37 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 3 Jul 2008 04:56:37 -0700, 10.22.241.41
Lines: 3
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1977
Article PK: 97581

Multiversion concurrency control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_control
Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?


Eugene Korolkov Posted on 2008-07-03 20:23:29.0Z
Message-ID: <486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com>
From: Eugene Korolkov <ekorolkov@davidsohn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
To: "Alberto da Silva"
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
References: <486cbe75.5d10.1681692777@sybase.com>
In-Reply-To: <486cbe75.5d10.1681692777@sybase.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000700080509030109070807"
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 3 Jul 2008 13:23:29 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215116609 10.22.241.152 (3 Jul 2008 13:23:29 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 3 Jul 2008 13:23:29 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Lines: 56
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1978
Article PK: 97579

Alberto,

I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft already 3 years.
Probably they are waiting for IBM which also does not have it so far AFAIK.
I think without that it is not even truly relational database.
 
Regards,
Eugene
Alberto da Silva wrote:

Multiversion concurrency control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_control Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?


Alberto da Silva Posted on 2008-07-04 14:48:49.0Z
Sender: 5cfb.486cbd9e.1804289383@sybase.com
From: Alberto da Silva
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
X-Mailer: WebNews to Mail Gateway v1.1t
Message-ID: <486e3851.168f.1681692777@sybase.com>
References: <486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
Date: 4 Jul 2008 07:48:49 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215182929 10.22.241.41 (4 Jul 2008 07:48:49 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 4 Jul 2008 07:48:49 -0700, 10.22.241.41
Lines: 20
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1979
Article PK: 97580

The benefits would certainly help in our environment.
Is it even on the radar?

Alberto

> Alberto,
>
> I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
> Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft already 3
> years. Probably they are waiting for IBM which also does
> not have it so far AFAIK. I think without that it is not
> even truly relational database.
>
> Regards,
> Eugene
> Alberto da Silva wrote:
>
> >Multiversion concurrency control
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_con
> trol >Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?


Niksa Jurinovic Posted on 2008-07-04 18:57:01.0Z
Message-ID: <486e727c@forums-1-dub>
From: Niksa Jurinovic <niksa@jurinovic.de>
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com> <486e3851.168f.1681692777@sybase.com>
Lines: 35
Organization: Indenpendent developer
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 4 Jul 2008 11:57:01 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215197821 10.22.241.152 (4 Jul 2008 11:57:01 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 4 Jul 2008 11:57:01 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1980
Article PK: 97583

Hi Alberto and Eugene,

what a coincidence! I was about to submit the feature request on ISUG site.
If you are ISUG members, please vote for it.

Regards

Niksa Jurinovic
niksa@jurinovic.de

Alberto da Silva wrote:

> The benefits would certainly help in our environment.
> Is it even on the radar?
>
> Alberto
>
>> Alberto,
>>
>> I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
>> Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft already 3
>> years. Probably they are waiting for IBM which also does
>> not have it so far AFAIK. I think without that it is not
>> even truly relational database.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Eugene
>> Alberto da Silva wrote:
>>
>> >Multiversion concurrency control
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_con
>> trol >Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?


Alberto da Silva Posted on 2008-07-07 09:25:45.0Z
Sender: 2484.4871e022.1804289383@sybase.com
From: Alberto da Silva
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
X-Mailer: WebNews to Mail Gateway v1.1t
Message-ID: <4871e119.249c.1681692777@sybase.com>
References: <486e727c@forums-1-dub>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.22.241.41
Date: 7 Jul 2008 02:25:45 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215422745 10.22.241.41 (7 Jul 2008 02:25:45 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 7 Jul 2008 02:25:45 -0700, 10.22.241.41
Lines: 47
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1983
Article PK: 97586

Hi,

Am a member of ISUG and will vote for the request.

From my understanding, backupserver seems to use MVCC.

Regards,

Alberto

> Hi Alberto and Eugene,
>
> what a coincidence! I was about to submit the feature
> request on ISUG site. If you are ISUG members, please vote
> for it.
>
> Regards
>
> Niksa Jurinovic
> niksa@jurinovic.de
>
>
>
> Alberto da Silva wrote:
>
> > The benefits would certainly help in our environment.
> > Is it even on the radar?
> >
> > Alberto
> >
> >> Alberto,
> >>
> >> I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
> >> Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft
> already 3 >> years. Probably they are waiting for IBM
> which also does >> not have it so far AFAIK. I think
> without that it is not >> even truly relational database.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Eugene
> >> Alberto da Silva wrote:
> >>
> >> >Multiversion concurrency control
> >>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_con
> >> trol >Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?
>


EUGENE KOROLKOV Posted on 2008-07-30 03:48:41.0Z
From: "EUGENE KOROLKOV" <ekorolkov@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <486e727c@forums-1-dub> <4871e119.249c.1681692777@sybase.com>
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
Lines: 70
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080729-1, 07/29/2008), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <488fe499$1@forums-1-dub>
Date: 29 Jul 2008 20:48:41 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1217389721 10.22.241.152 (29 Jul 2008 20:48:41 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 29 Jul 2008 20:48:41 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1984
Article PK: 97587

Alberto,

The backup server result (dbump) is like select under snapshot isolation,
but taking at the end of select, not at the beginning which is usual for
that,
though it is not using sql at all I think, just straight OS copy + applying
trlog changes.

I even proposed for ASE 2 forms of the select cmd result:
(1st-the snapshot taking before select starts i.e. ignoring any changes
(updates/inserts,deletes)
happened during select execution) , 2nd -after it is finished, i.e. with all
changes have been applied.
(like backupserver dump)
Actually Oracle already has flashback queries, i.e. select result with
changes at any time back.

Regards,
Eugene

<Alberto da Silva> wrote in message
news:4871e119.249c.1681692777@sybase.com...
> Hi,
>
> Am a member of ISUG and will vote for the request.
>
> From my understanding, backupserver seems to use MVCC.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alberto
>
>> Hi Alberto and Eugene,
>>
>> what a coincidence! I was about to submit the feature
>> request on ISUG site. If you are ISUG members, please vote
>> for it.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Niksa Jurinovic
>> niksa@jurinovic.de
>>
>>
>>
>> Alberto da Silva wrote:
>>
>> > The benefits would certainly help in our environment.
>> > Is it even on the radar?
>> >
>> > Alberto
>> >
>> >> Alberto,
>> >>
>> >> I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
>> >> Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft
>> already 3 >> years. Probably they are waiting for IBM
>> which also does >> not have it so far AFAIK. I think
>> without that it is not >> even truly relational database.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Eugene
>> >> Alberto da Silva wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Multiversion concurrency control
>> >>
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_con
>> >> trol >Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?
>>


Carl Kayser Posted on 2008-07-05 13:50:53.0Z
From: "Carl Kayser" <kayser_c@bls.gov>
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <486cbe75.5d10.1681692777@sybase.com> <486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com>
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
Lines: 89
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001B_01C8DE84.649B2E40"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Message-ID: <486f7c3d@forums-1-dub>
Date: 5 Jul 2008 06:50:53 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215265853 10.22.241.152 (5 Jul 2008 06:50:53 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 5 Jul 2008 06:50:53 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
X-Authenticated-User: ase1251
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1981
Article PK: 97584

 
"Eugene Korolkov" <ekorolkov@davidsohn.com> wrote in message news:486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com...
Alberto,

I am asking about that for years. Just some promises.
Still no luck. Oracle has it 20 years, Microsoft already 3 years.
Probably they are waiting for IBM which also does not have it so far AFAIK.
I think without that it is not even truly relational database.
 
Regards,
Eugene
Alberto da Silva wrote:
Multiversion concurrency control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiversion_concurrency_control Does anyone know if ASE will get this feature?

 
It may be a very good feature to have but "I think without that it is not even truly relational database" is a really foolish statement.  One could claim that a DBMS isn't relational unless is it is column-based or must support both datapage and datarow locking just as well with that "logic".


Niksa Jurinovic Posted on 2008-07-05 22:01:53.0Z
Message-ID: <486fef51@forums-1-dub>
From: Niksa Jurinovic <niksa@jurinovic.de>
Subject: Re: MVCC Multiversion concurrency control in ASE
Newsgroups: sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion
References: <486cbe75.5d10.1681692777@sybase.com> <486D344F.8080601@davidsohn.com> <486f7c3d@forums-1-dub>
Lines: 46
Organization: Indenpendent developer
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: vip152.sybase.com
Date: 5 Jul 2008 15:01:53 -0700
X-Trace: forums-1-dub 1215295313 10.22.241.152 (5 Jul 2008 15:01:53 -0700)
X-Original-Trace: 5 Jul 2008 15:01:53 -0700, vip152.sybase.com
Path: forums-1-dub!not-for-mail
Xref: forums-1-dub sybase.public.ase.product_futures_discussion:1982
Article PK: 97585


Carl Kayser wrote:

> It may be a very good feature to have but "I think without that it is
> not even truly relational database" is a really foolish statement. One
> could claim that a DBMS isn't relational unless is it is column-based or
> must support both datapage and datarow locking just as well with that
> "logic".

Hi Carl,

even though the definition of "RELATIONAL DBMS" has nothing to do with the
definition of "MULTIVERSION CONCURRENCY" (many users can access data at the
same time) or "MULTIVERSION CONSISTENCY" (each user sees a consistent view
of the data), they are closely tied up together, particularly in practice.
So, I don't think Eugene's statement is foolish. It may be called a "syntax
error", but semantically it holds water.

Anyway I submitted the ISUG feature request yesterday and, in a week or so,
hope it will be in. I expect you'll vote positive. It's high time ASE
product management folks adopted this technology, since their current
locking schema is horrific. Even dirty reads had to be allowed to bypass
the limitation of such a technology (unwanted blockings and waitings).
Personally, I'd be happy to see a model similar to Oracle's. Oracle
combines multiversion concurrency control with non-escalating row-level
locking. This is a very efficient, flexible and logically consistent
transaction model which guarantees that

* readers never block writers
* writers never block readers
* different-row writers never block writers

This is true at statement-level and transaction-level, either by READ
COMMITTED or SERIALIZABLE isolation level. Only same-row writers block
writers, that is normal. Each user is guaranteed to see a consistent view
(snapshot) of the data that was committed at the time the query started.
Since allowing dirty reads doesn't make any sense in the model (no
lockings/blockings having to be bypassed), the READ UNCOMMITTED isolation
level doesn't exist. This is a must-have technology for any serious DBMS,
relational or non-relational. Hope we are agreed on this.


Regards

Niksa Jurinovic
niksa@jurinovic.de