| From: | "Mike Mascari" <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Mike Mascari" <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <kward(at)peerdirect(dot)com>, <patrickm(at)redhat(dot)com>, <darren(at)up(dot)hrcoxmail(dot)com>, "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, <jrnield(at)usol(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Big 7.4 items |
| Date: | 2002-12-13 19:34:54 |
| Message-ID: | 00c301c2a2de$b6ff0180$0102a8c0@mascari.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
>
> I guess I'm basically asking:
>
> 1) Is it necessary to *choose* between support for 2PC and Spread (Postgres-R) or can't we have both? Spread for Replication, 2PC for non-replicating distributed TX?
>
> 2) Do major SQL DBMS vendors which support distributed options expose a callable interface into a 2PC protocol that would allow PostgreSQL to participate? I could check on this...
>
> 3) Are there any standards (besides ODBC, which, the last time I looked just had COMMIT/ABORT APIs), that have been defined and adopted by the industry for distributed tx?
Answer:
The Open Group's Open/XA C193 specificiation for API for distributed transactions:
http://www.opengroup.org/public/pubs/catalog/c193.htm
I couldn't find any draft copies on the web, but a good description at the Sybase site:
The standard is 2PC based.
Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-12-13 19:45:43 | Re: Big 7.4 items |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-12-13 19:13:21 | Re: PQnotifies() in 7.3 broken? |