Talk:Distributed transaction

I feel that this article is a little difficult to read. I'm sure this could be simplified to make it less arcane. From a personal viewpoint, I've got two Master's degrees in Electronic Engineering and Industrial Computing and I struggled to get through the language used here. --Gantlord 13:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree. All I wanted was a simple explanation, yet the language used here is way above the average person's understanding. Something a little more basic would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.206.90 (talk) 08:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

How about mentioning CAP theorem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.150.132.94 (talk) 12:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Coming from someone who works with distributed, transactional systems, I didn't find this difficult to read at all. Maybe it is arcane, and above the average reader, but that's because it is rather arcane topic by nature. I think this article would most benefit from some details about why distributed transactions are a problem (their history, the challenges they impose) and some more related materials such as the "two-general's problem" and what strategies (beyond and deeper then two-phase commit) have been implemented to deal with these problems. By the way, Microsoft's distributed transaction manager is called MS DTC (Microsoft Distributed Transaction Coordinator). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boojiggly (talk • contribs) 03:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Commitment ordering
The neutrality of part of this page is disputed, as part of a wider discussion. See Talk:Commitment ordering and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer science. —Ruud 14:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

No mention of distributed consensus like paxos ?
To my (limited) knowledge a way to implement distributed transaction is the use of the Paxos and Paxos-like algorithms. Shouldn't it be mentioned here ? --MindTailor (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2017 (UTC)