| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Two-phase commit issues |
| Date: | 2005-05-20 17:14:14 |
| Message-ID: | 26289.1116609254@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> As I remember, you said two-phase wasn't 100% reliable and we just
> needed a way to report failures.
[ Shrug... ] I remain of the opinion that 2PC is a solution in search
of a problem, because it does not solve the single point of failure
issue (just moves same from the database to the 2PC controller).
But some people want it anyway, and they aren't going to be satisfied
that we are an "enterprise grade" database until we can check off this
particular bullet point. As long as the implementation doesn't impose
any significant costs when not being used (which AFAICS Heikki's method
doesn't), I think we gotta hold our noses and do it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | jordan | 2005-05-20 17:29:10 | Re: Two-phase commit issues |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-05-20 16:57:42 | Re: Two-phase commit issues |