Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic
От
Heikki Linnakangas
Тема
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic
Дата
Msg-id
457011EF.2050001@enterprisedb.com
Ответ на
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic (Kris Jurka)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
XA end then join fix for WebLogic Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Jan de Visser <jdevisser@digitalfairway.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Jan de Visser <jdevisser@digitalfairway.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Jan de Visser <jdevisser@digitalfairway.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Re: XA end then join fix for WebLogic Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>
Kris Jurka wrote: > Doesn't this allow: > > xaRes.start(xid, XAResource.TMNOFLAGS); > xaRes.end(xid, XAResource.TMFAIL); > xaRes.start(xid, XAResource.TMJOIN); > xaRes.end(xid, XAResource.TMSUCCESS); > xaRes.commit(xid, true); > > Is that actually a problem or do we assume the TM is smart enough not to > do this. Hmm, true, it does allow that. The TM really shouldn't be doing that. It's very confused if it does. However, given the sorry state of many TMs out there, it'd be nice if we did check for that. I'd say let's not bother checking that for now. In the future, we should roll back the transaction on end(TMFAIL) immediately, and add checking for that case as well. The way it works now is perfectly correct and legal, we're just not taking advantage of the hint the TM is giving us. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления