Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

LISTEN & transactions

From: "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
To: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: LISTEN & transactions
Date: 2001-12-02 15:49:14
Message-ID: 20011202164914.A12152@bulletproof (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
Hi all,

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 
entirely?

I can use the existing behaviour in libpqxx[1] 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.


Jeroen

[1] http://members.ams.chello.nl/j.vermeulen31/



Responses

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Jeroen T. VermeulenDate: 2001-12-02 15:57:39
Subject: LISTEN & Transactions (oops!)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-12-02 15:32:12
Subject: Re: Can a windows DLL have more than one process attached?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group