[cx01]

The two generals problem doesn't mean distributed transactions are impossible. It just means that you cannot guarantee liveness, i.e. a distributed commit protocol might block if the network fails. But it will never yield an inconsistent state (one node commiting and another node aborting).

[praptak]

On the contrary. The proof actually demonstrates that finite sequence of communication in presence of possible failures can not assure consistency.

[cassandravoiton]

Language gets in the here. But all 'distributed transaction' systems rely on the idea that once every party has agree to commit, it CAN commit. That might not be the case (I have seen it no be so often).