Re: BUG #5297: Add XATMI C API

Sorry, the link I included was for committers. Try this instead
https://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/blacktie/trunk/atmibroker-xatmi/src/example/txfooapp/
and the project page is http://www.jboss.org/blacktie

> We would certainly be very interested in testing XA support. Our
> project is called BlackTie - it's an XATMI implementation. We use the
> JBossTS transaction manager for the transaction engine - although
> JBossTS is written in Java, providing XA support was reasonably easy
> since it conforms to the OTS specification which means we can control
> transactions from a C based XA environment.
>
> There is an example of using different resource managers within
> transactions:
> https://svn.jboss.org/repos/blacktie/trunk/atmibroker-xatmi/src/example/txfooapp
>
> The files ora.c and db2.c show user code accessing resources from two
> different vendors - the XA specific information is defined in
> btconfig.xml (basically it just exposes the XA open string, the symbol
> name of the xa switch structure and the name of the library that
> exports the switch symbol).
>
>> On 21.04.2011 20:04, Michael Musgrove wrote:
>>> I am referring to the X/Open specification Distributed Transaction
>>> Processing: The XA Specification
>>> (pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009680699/toc.pdf). If postgresql
>>> provides a conforming Resource Manager switch then we can include
>>> postgresql work along with interactions with other Resource Managers
>>> (Oracle, DB2) in the same transaction. For example the equivalent
>>> support in Oracle that I am asking for is documented at
>>> http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/appdev.920/a96590/adga1_xa.htm
>>>
>>
>> When I wrote the patch for the backend support, I was not able to
>> find any open source implementations of X/Open XA-compatible resource
>> managers or transaction managers, which makes it kind of hard to
>> implement the API correctly. There was plenty of JDBC XA
>> implementations, however, so I used that for testing.
>>
>> If you can find something to test it with, it probably wouldn't be
>> that hard to write the library.
>>
>