Re: 3-phase commit presented in Austria last week (video)

Sorry, correction:

On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 at 11:20, Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org> wrote:

> One disadvantage is (1) that (like in streaming payments), a sender can
> get stuck having paid half the amount for for instance a purchase, and
> possibly no way to pay the other half.
>

This is not actually the case - even if one of the connectors is being slow
and the payment would partially fulfill, the receiver would still receive
the full amount. The connector that timed out has to pay a small fee, and
this amount is given to the sender as a sort of discount.

The receiver should only accept the payment if they are within the timeout,
and it is their own responsibility to reject a payment if phase 3 is
reached after the timeout. Part of it will already have started rejecting
then, and for the receiver it's probably best to reject the rest as well,
and tell the sender to retry the payment.

For a connector on the other hand, it can make sense to still fulfill
during the gradual timeout, to limit their losses.

Cheers,
Michiel

>