Talk:Two-phase commit protocol: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:32, 18 April 2006

Revision as of 01:24, 12 June 2006

Line 11:

First, it can be biased either to commit or abort (see literature). Also, all known commercial implementations recover correctly (to abort) if such faliure occures. No resource commits before completion (decision by coordinator)

--------------

How can it be that "all known commercial implementations recover correctly (to abort) if such faliure occures [sic]?" At some point the coordinator must start calling the FINAL commits on all the participants, either all at once or one-at-a-time (same thing). If one of the partipants fails the final commit, won't the data be left in an inconsistent state? This is what the "resources that committed prior to this failure cannot be rolled back" is suggesting.

I believe this is a MAJOR question (really, "'is two-phase commit' a magic bullet?") and even IF it is true that "all known commerical implementations recover correctly," I think that this magical point should be included in the article somehow. --[[User:Daniel Rosenstark|Daniel Rosenstark]] 01:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)