Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan writes:
>
> > Does the proposal of allowing dbas to run that risk, provided there's a
> > mechanism to tell them about it, satisfy the objection (assuming, of
> > course, 2PC can be turned off)?
>
> Why would you spent time on implementing a mechanism whose ultimate
> benefit is supposed to be increasing reliability and performance, when you
> already realize that it will have to lock up at the slightest sight of
> trouble? There are better mechanisms out there that you can use instead.
If you want cross-server transactions, what other methods are there that
are more reliable? It seems network unreliability is going to be a
problem no matter what method you use.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
