From: | "Xavier Bugaud" <xavier(dot)bugaud(at)gloptv(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Full XA availability ? |
Date: | 2006-02-10 09:01:10 |
Message-ID: | 60BA566AF1B3934FA866BAC174836759026F9F@mail.parabolemaurice.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Hi Heikki,
> Many other big JDBC implementations don't support it either,
> or fake it, or support it only partially. Therefore no transaction
> coordinator implementation can rely on transaction interleaving or
> suspend/resume anyway, or at least have to provide a flag to
> work around
> it. Therefore there's very little practical value in actually
> implementing them, beside being able to tick the "fully XA-compliant"
> checkbox in marketing material.
All the application servers need XA for distributed transactions, so I
think there is a huge practical value to be "fully XA compliant".
It's a very common practise when using J2EE container managed
transactions to suspend the current transaction and start a new one for
example.
Regards.
--
Xavier Bugaud
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2006-02-10 14:18:30 | Re: Full XA availability ? |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2006-02-10 08:34:00 | Re: Full XA availability ? |