Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> > > The simplest senario(though there could be varations) is
> >
> > > [At participant(master)'s side]
> > > Because the commit operations is done, does nothing.
> >
> > > [At coordinator(slave)' side]
> > > 1) After a while
> > > 2) re-establish the communication path between the
> > > partcipant(master)'s TM.
> > > 3) resend the "commit requeset" to the participant's TM.
> > > 1)2)3) would be repeated until the coordinator receives
> > > the "commit ok" message from the partcipant.
> >
> > [ scratches head ] I think you are using the terms "master" and "slave"
> > oppositely than I would.
>
> Oops my mistake, sorry.
> But is it 2-phase commit protocol in the first place ?
That is, in your exmaple below
Example:
Master Slave ------ ----- commit ready--> <--OK commit
done->XX
is the "commit done" message needed ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inouehttp://www.geocities.jp/inocchichichi/psqlodbc/
