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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
