On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:09 AM, James Henstridge wrote:
> When writing the TPC additions for the spec, I did take PostgreSQL
> into account (I thought I'd have time to write the psycopg2
> implementation back then). The reasoning for using the three part
> identifiers was that the XA-style iden
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Daniele Varrazzo
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:48 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>
>> I'd also look around to check how other tools that interoperate with
>> PG in two-phase commits handle this. XA is a widely used standard
>> in the industry, so I assume the prob
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 9:48 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> I'd also look around to check how other tools that interoperate with
> PG in two-phase commits handle this. XA is a widely used standard
> in the industry, so I assume the problem must have popped up
> elsewhere as well.
MySQL uses a XA mod
Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've recently joined the db-sig ML, and I've read the threads about
> the two phase commit interface design of Jan 2008.
>
> I'd like to implement the DBAPI TPC extension in psycopg2: I'm
> considering the best way to overcome the slight model difference
> bet
Hello,
I've recently joined the db-sig ML, and I've read the threads about
the two phase commit interface design of Jan 2008.
I'd like to implement the DBAPI TPC extension in psycopg2: I'm
considering the best way to overcome the slight model difference
between the XA-inspired DBAPI and the Postg
