Oracle中比SQL Server更好的并发性吗? [英] Better concurrency in Oracle than SQL Server?

问题描述

与MS SQL Server数据库相比，Oracle数据库中可以实现更好的并发性吗?尤其是在OLTP方案中，例如ERP系统?

Is it true that better concurrency can be achieved in Oracle databases than in MS SQL Server databases? In particular in an OLTP scenario, such as an ERP system?

我听过一位SAP顾问的说法，指的是Oracle锁定技术，例如行锁定和多版本读取一致性以及重做日志.

I've overheard an SAP consultant making this claim, referring to Oracle locking techniques like row locking and multi-version read consistency and the redo log.

推荐答案

Oracle开箱即用，它将具有更高的事务吞吐量，但这是因为它默认为读取已提交的隔离级别

Out of the box, Oracle will have a higher transaction throughput but this is because it defaults to MVCC. SQL Server defaults to blocking selects on uncommitted updates but it can be changed to MVCC as well so that difference should basically go away. See Read Committed Isolation Level.

请参见启用基于行版本控制的隔离级别.

当ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION 数据库选项设置为ON， Microsoft SQL Server的实例 数据库引擎不生成行 修改数据的版本，直到所有 已修改的活跃交易 数据库中的数据完整.如果 有积极的修改 事务，SQL Server设置 选项的状态为PENDING_ON. 经过所有的修改 交易完成，状态 该选项将更改为开".用户数 无法在中启动快照事务 该数据库，直到选项为 完全开启.数据库通过 数据库处于PENDING_OFF状态 管理员设置 ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION选项用于 关闭.

When the ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION database option is set ON, the instance of the Microsoft SQL Server Database Engine does not generate row versions for modified data until all active transactions that have modified data in the database complete. If there are active modification transactions, SQL Server sets the state of the option to PENDING_ON. After all of the modification transactions complete, the state of the option is changed to ON. Users cannot start a snapshot transaction in that database until the option is fully ON. The database passes through a PENDING_OFF state when the database administrator sets the ALLOW_SNAPSHOT_ISOLATION option to OFF.

这篇关于Oracle中比SQL Server更好的并发性吗?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！