thats true.. in the TPM-TM context the specific call is xa_rollback to quote "In the context of the TPM PM the TM issues a commit or rollback to all RMs which are participating in the transaction." http://stanford.edu/dept/itss/docs/oracle/10g/appdev.101/b10795/adfns_xa.htm
Martin Gainty ______________________________________________ Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen. Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni. > Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:31:56 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Support for XA > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:17:21PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:50:04AM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: > > > Tim Bunce wrote: > > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 01:53:36PM -0500, David Dooling wrote: > > >>> If any of the SQL fails, then all the DB transactions are rolled back. > > >> > > >> If two databases are being used, and the commit to the first succeeds > > >> and the commit to the second fails, how does it "rollback" the first > > >> commit? > > > > > > Depending on the reason for failure, it could still be done when using > > > something like a two-phase commit protocol. This isn't a 100% solution, > > > but for the situations where it works you don't need to undo the > > > succeeding > > > databases. -- Darren Duncan > > > > I know. I was just asking a leading question to draw out the issue ;-) > > > > My point was the UR doesn't actually do what it was described as doing: > > "If any of the SQL fails, then all the DB transactions are rolled back." > > David as agreed in a folowup message. > > Just to clarify a bit, if any of the executed SQL (prepares, executes, > dos, etc.) fails during a transaction, all transactions are rolled > back. If the commit fails, which, in our experience, is a rare event > and typically indicative of some other issue with the database (e.g., > heavy load causing slowness and large rollback segments), then an > error is returned. > > -- > David Dooling > http://www.politigenomics.com/ _________________________________________________________________ Microsoft brings you a new way to search the web. Try Bing™ now http://www.bing.com?form=MFEHPG&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MFEHPG_Core_tagline_try bing_1x1
