Re: Question concerning XTM (eXtensible Transaction Manager API)

> I think the general idea is that if Commit is WAL logged, then the
> operation is considered to committed on local node and commit should
> happen on any node, only once prepare from all nodes is successful.
> And after that transaction is not supposed to abort. But I think you are
> trying to optimize the DTM in some way to not follow that kind of
protocol.
> By the way, how will arbiter does the recovery in a scenario where it
> crashes, won't it need to contact all nodes for the status of in-progress
or
> prepared transactions?
> I think it would be better if more detailed design of DTM with respect to
> transaction management and recovery could be updated on wiki for having
> discussion on this topic. I have seen that you have already updated many
> details of the system, but still the complete picture of DTM is not clear.

I agree.

I have not been following this discussion but from what I have read above I
think the recovery model in this design is broken. You have to follow some
protocol, whichever you choose.

I think you can try using something like Paxos, if you are looking at a
higher reliable model but don't want the overhead of 3PC.