On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 13:58, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Patrick Welche wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2003 at 02:49:30PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > ... > > > if we are talking two computers sitting next to each other on a switch, > > > you'd expect those to be low ... but if you were talking about two > > > seperate geographical locations (and yes, I realize you are adding lag to > > > the mix with waiting for responses), you'd expect those #s to rise ... > > > > Which I thought was the whole point of using a group communication protocol > > such as spread in postgresql-r. It seemed solved there... > > Right, but I think we want to try to do two-phase commit without spread. > Spread seems overkill for this usage.
Out of curiosity, how does one use spread to accomplish 2PC? Isn't the logic the Application Server would need to follow rather different with a group communication based control than with XA / 2PC style communication? How does one map to the other?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
