[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4605?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16435913#comment-16435913
 ] 

James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-4605:
---------------------------------------

Thanks, [~aertoria]! FYI, attached v2 patch with the following changes:
 * Removed PhoenixTransactionalTable interface as it's not needed
 * Added simple, general mechanism for a transaction provider to determine 
whether they support a particular feature or not. Only example so far is 
whether they support transitioning a table from non transactional to 
transactional (Tephra does, but Omid doesn't). There might be other feature 
differences we can model in the future as well, so figured this is better than 
adding {{if (provider == XXX)}} all over the code.

> Support running multiple transaction providers
> ----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-4605
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4605
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: James Taylor
>            Assignee: James Taylor
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-4605_v1.patch, PHOENIX-4605_v2.patch, 
> PHOENIX-4605_wip1.patch, PHOENIX-4605_wip2.patch, PHOENIX_4605_wip3.patch
>
>
> We should deprecate QueryServices.DEFAULT_TABLE_ISTRANSACTIONAL_ATTRIB and 
> instead have a QueryServices.DEFAULT_TRANSACTION_PROVIDER now that we'll have 
> two transaction providers: Tephra and Omid. Along the same lines, we should 
> add a TRANSACTION_PROVIDER column to SYSTEM.CATALOG  and stop using the 
> IS_TRANSACTIONAL table property. For backwards compatibility, we can assume 
> the provider is Tephra if the existing properties are set to true.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to