I noticed that using libpq, trigger notifications don't arrive inside
transactions. Instead their delivery appears to be deferred until after
the transaction ends. I haven't found any mention of this in the manual.
Is this a design choice, or a "coincidence" resulting from practical
implementation considerations, or a mistake on my part, or something else
I can use the existing behaviour in libpqxx to guarantee that a
trigger handler is always able to start a transaction on the connection
the notification came in on. But that probably wouldn't make much sense
(though it would still be possible) unless the current way of doing
things is here to stay.
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Jeroen T. Vermeulen||Date: 2001-12-02 15:57:39|
|Subject: LISTEN & Transactions (oops!)|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2001-12-02 15:32:12|
|Subject: Re: Can a windows DLL have more than one process attached? |