Hi Heikki,
> Many other big JDBC implementations don't support it either,
> or fake it, or support it only partially. Therefore no transaction
> coordinator implementation can rely on transaction interleaving or
> suspend/resume anyway, or at least have to provide a flag to
> work around
> it. Therefore there's very little practical value in actually
> implementing them, beside being able to tick the "fully XA-compliant"
> checkbox in marketing material.
All the application servers need XA for distributed transactions, so I
think there is a huge practical value to be "fully XA compliant".
It's a very common practise when using J2EE container managed
transactions to suspend the current transaction and start a new one for
example.
Regards.
--
Xavier Bugaud