|
> From: Marc Logemann > > But you allways think in terms of disk crashes. Commitment control is > more an issue because of transactional boundaries. Or do i miss > something in this thread? We keep going round and round in circles, because people keep changing the discussion. There are two places where CC is used: crash recovery and transaction boundaries. In my opinion, any benefits that arise from CC regarding transaction boundaries can be programmed in just as readily yourself, especially with a decent system design. If, on the other hand, you're allowing massive updates from outside your system such as through ODBC, then CC is probably a good idea. Not to mention a lot of prayers. In recovery from hard disk crashes, CC becomes a simple business decision. Do I spend the money on the disk and lose the performance, or do I rely on RAID, mirroring and a UPS to do their jobs? Joe
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
