Re: Two weeks to feature freeze

The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>>Mike Mascari wrote:
>>
>>>I was disappointed that Satoshi Nagayasu's two-phase commit
>>>patches seemed to be implicitly rejected by lack of an
>>>enthusiastic response by any of the core members. Distributed
>>>query (not replication) would have been a very nice feature.
>>>It's what separates, in part, Oracle Enterprise Edition from the
>>>Standard Edition, and it appeared someone (Satoshi Nagayasu) was
>>>more than willing to get the ball rolling. But the flight path
>>>bothered some I guess so we got nothin'
>>
>>I sure want two-phase commit. I don't remember it as being rejected,
>>and we certainly need it, independent of replication.
>
> I don't recall the patch itself :(
>
> Mike, do you recall the date(s) for this? Reasons for rejections?

I choose my words poorly. A discussion arose regarding the 7.4
protocol changes. I suggested looking forward to allow for a 2PC
implementation. Satoshi Nagayasu remarked about the work done on 2PC
and posted a link to patches:

http://snaga.org/pgsql/pgsql-20021025.tgz

The thread was here:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-11/msg00143.php

Various people critiqued the work that had been done - protocol change
instead of a purely statement-driven implementation, the use of 2PC
for sync. replication, etc. And that was the last (and first, IIRC)
post from Satoshi Nagayasu. I was worried that PostgreSQL lost the
opportunity to have a 2PC implementation, because no one followed up,
allowing it to die on the vine.

I have learned from Rod Taylor that lack of posts on hackers doesn't
mean lack of work:

"They weren't ready to be committed at the time, nor are they now.
The hardest parts are still to come (resume, forget, etc.).
I believe he is still working on the third phase:

http://snaga.org/pgsql/

-- Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>"

So I stand corrected.

Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com