On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 3:37 AM Dinesh Joshi <djos...@icloud.com.invalid>
wrote:
> On 10/14/21 6:54 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>
> > I think I've also been clear that I want a path to supporting (1) local
> > latencies (SLOG is a more elegant solution but "let's just let people
> give
> > up global serializability like LWT" is also reasonable) and (2) SQL with
> > interactive transactions.
>
>
> 99% of the transactions in a system will not be performed as interactive
> SQL transactions by a human. We should be optimizing for the 99%.
>
>
"Interactive" here does not mean that it's a human typing the queries. It
rather means that there are more than one round trips between the client
and server.
Any application doing:
BEGIN
x = SELECT x FROM ...
if x == 5:
UPDATE t SET y=6
COMMIT
...would be an interactive transaction. And this is traditionally the
common case, even if recent NewSQL and NoSQL databases have introduced some
intriguing outside of the box thinking in this area.
henrik
--
Henrik Ingo
+358 40 569 7354 <358405697354>
[image: Visit us online.] <https://www.datastax.com/> [image: Visit us on
Twitter.] <https://twitter.com/DataStaxEng> [image: Visit us on YouTube.]
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_channel_UCqA6zOSMpQ55vvguq4Y0jAg&d=DwMFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=IFj3MdIKYLLXIUhYdUGB0cTzTlxyCb7_VUmICBaYilU&m=bmIfaie9O3fWJAu6lESvWj3HajV4VFwgwgVuKmxKZmE&s=16sY48_kvIb7sRQORknZrr3V8iLTfemFKbMVNZhdwgw&e=>
[image: Visit my LinkedIn profile.] <https://www.linkedin.com/in/heingo/>
