Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> I sure want two-phase commit. I don't remember it as being rejected,
>> and we certainly need it, independent of replication.
>
> Is 2PC a real-world solution to any real-world problem? I have never
> seen a satisfactory explanation of what you do when you've reported that
> you're ready to commit and no confirmation ever comes back. Sooner or
> later you must violate the protocol in one direction or the other (ie,
> commit without confirmation or roll back in violation of your promise
> of being able to commit).
>
> I think it's a cool-sounding phrase that does not actually work in
> practice.
The other problem I was missing being addressed is what happens if one
promised "I can commit" and crashes? Not exactly at the time he crashes,
but more at the time he restarts? Doesn't he have to restart into
exactly that state of "I can commit", with all locks in place and yet
being able to rollback and then again ask "and what now"? I would be
surprised if said patch does that ... very *positively* surprised!
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
