| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: XA |
| Date: | 2005-09-30 20:29:35 |
| Message-ID: | 1128112175.4045.7.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 08:23 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >I didn't realise that the 2PC we have implemented was not XA.
> >
> >That's bad news. To most people they are the same thing, so I foresee
> >some fairly poor feedback.
> >
> >
> To most people where? I am not being antagonistic, I am just curious if
> this is a Java
> community thing or if you impression is "in general" people consider
> them the same
> thing.
Well, for a long time CICS 2PC was not XA. So if you're an IBM
mainframer then you might ask what type of 2PC we support.
Every other conversation I've had on this, XA has been used synonomously
with 2PC. So I mean, in general.
XA predates J2EE and JDBC.
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-09-30 20:36:49 | Re: Next version: putting the pedal down |
| Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2005-09-30 20:13:45 | Re: Time to start the PR machine |