Talk:Comparison of relational database management systems: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Edit Request: reply |
Oracle ACID question Tag: Possible vandalism |
||
Line 6:
}}
{{User:WildBot/m04|sect={{User:WildBot/m03|1|Comparison of relational database management systems#fn 2|2|#fn 2}}, {{User:WildBot/m03|1|Comparison of relational database management systems#idx 10 back|Note (10):|#idx 10 back}}, {{User:WildBot/m03|1|Comparison of relational database management systems#idx 11 back|Note (11):|#idx 11 back}}|m04}}
== Why Oracle is marked as ACID compliant?
It doesn't provide ANSI SERIALIZABLE isolation level (allows non-serializable executions). So, it lacks full transaction isolation. Or, if ACID actually means nothing these days, why not just remove its line?
This is the citation from this wiki (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapshot_isolation): "Snapshot isolation is called "serializable" mode in Oracle..."
[[Special:Contributions/176.194.72.92|176.194.72.92]] ([[User talk:176.194.72.92|talk]]) 01:26, 18 October 2015 (UTC) anonymous
== How can MySQL possibly be ACID compliant? Surely it should be marked as "No" under ACID ==
| |||