Re: XA

From: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>
Subject: Re: XA
Date: 2005-09-30 05:31:22
Message-ID: Pine.BSO.4.61.0509300016270.9723@leary.csoft.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Josh Berkus wrote:

> But ... now that we have 2PC, XA could be implemented through pg-jdbc if
> someone wanted to, yes?
>

We have patches for xa support pending, but have not committed them yet.
Our 2PC support doesn't allow a full XA implementation because full XA
allows multiple transactions to run in parallel on the same resource and
allows other threads to join an already running transaction. The
question is whether application servers and transaction managers do
this by default and whether it can be disabled. Initial research shows
our support may be good enough for practical purposes.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2005-06/msg00165.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2005-06/msg00171.php

Kris Jurka

In response to

  • Re: XA at 2005-09-30 03:09:31 from Josh Berkus

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gaetano Mendola 2005-09-30 08:44:09 Re: Time to start the PR machine
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-09-30 03:09:31 Re: XA