> Certainly not; ACID was a recognized goal long before anyone thought of
> MVCC. You do need much more locking to make it work without MVCC,
> though --- for instance, a reader that is interested in a just-modified
> row has to block until the writer completes or rolls back.
>
> People who hang around Postgres too long tend to think that MVCC is the
> obviously correct way to do things, but much of the rest of the world
> thinks differently ;-)
Well, that would explain why everyone is so happy with PostgreSQL's
concurrent access performance.
Thanks for the information, although I'm not sure I wanted to be
reminded about complicated locking issues ( I suppose I must have known
that at one time, but perhaps I surpressed it ;-)
Regards,Jeff Davis