Re: Big 7.4 items

Mike Mascari wrote:
> Okay. But please keep in mind that a 2-phase commit implementation
> is used for more than just replication. Any distributed TX will
> require a 2PC protocol. As an example, for the DBLINK implementation
> to ultimately be transaction safe (at least amongst multiple
> PostgreSQL installations), the players in the distributed
> transaction must all be participants in a 2PC exchange. And a
> participant whose communications link is dropped needs to be
> able to recover by asking the coordinator whether or not to
> complete or abort the distributed TX. I am 100% ignorant of the
> distributed TX standard Tom referenced earlier, but I'd guess
> there might be an assumption of 2PC support in the implementation.
> In other words, I think we still need 2PC, regardless of the
> method of replication. And if Satoshi Nagayasu has an implementation
> ready, why not investigate its possibilities?

This is a good point. I don't want to push Postgres-R as our solution.
Rather, I have looked at both and like Postgres-R, but others need to
look at both and decide so we are all in agreement when we move forward.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073