Horton
Menu

Re: Big 7.4 items

Mike Mascari <mascarm@mascari.com>

View thread
From: "Mike Mascari" <mascarm@mascari.com>
To: "Mike Mascari" <mascarm@mascari.com>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, <kward@peerdirect.com>, <patrickm@redhat.com>, <darren@up.hrcoxmail.com>, "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>, <jrnield@usol.com>
Date: 2002-12-13T19:34:54Z
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:

http://manuals.sybase.com/onlinebooks/group-xs/xsg1111e/xatuxedo/@ebt-link;pt=61?target=%25N%13_446_START_RESTART_N%25

The standard is 2PC based.

Mike Mascari
mascarm@mascari.com