From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | RekGRpth <rekgrpth(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #16258: exec_simple_query does not call ProcessCompletedNotifies after CommitTransactionCommand |
Date: | 2020-02-14 17:14:53 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwZg50MEY3N9co-9toSy5MvwWQSKvqyUut=RuYgukCMCWA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
>
>
> пт, 14 февр. 2020 г. в 20:36, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>
>> RekGRpth <rekgrpth(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > No, it wasn't. I listen in another connection and receive both
>> > notifications but only after 10 seconds!
>>
>> Doesn't sound like a bug to me. The sending backend will only
>> send out notifications when it goes idle
>>
>
Does a non-interactive psql session ever go idle mid-script?
On Friday, February 14, 2020, RekGRpth <rekgrpth(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Ok, thanks. But I expect to receive notification at every transaction
> commit!
> with bst
>
This seems reasonable on its face and I don’t see any documentation
regarding this aspect of timing. All the docs says is listen/notify only
take effect after the transaction they are in commits. Absent further info
one can reasonably assume that they take effect immediately after commit
and not at the first idle moment subsequent to the commit.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-02-14 17:30:59 | Re: BUG #16258: exec_simple_query does not call ProcessCompletedNotifies after CommitTransactionCommand |
Previous Message | RekGRpth | 2020-02-14 15:37:44 | Re: BUG #16258: exec_simple_query does not call ProcessCompletedNotifies after CommitTransactionCommand |