Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

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 (view raw or flat)
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

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Gaetano MendolaDate: 2005-09-30 08:44:09
Subject: Re: Time to start the PR machine
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2005-09-30 03:09:31
Subject: Re: XA

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group