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

Re: notification payloads

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: notification payloads
Date: 2007-03-26 18:41:15
Message-ID: 460813CB.8000908@postgresql.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> No loss, but, per previous discussion, it would block and try to get
> other backends to collect their outstanding notifications.
> 
> Let's say we provide 100Kb for this (which is not a heck of a lot) ,
> that the average notification might be, say, 40 bytes of name plus 60
> bytes of message. Then we have room for about 1000 messages in the
> queue. This would get ugly only if backend presumably in the middle of
> some very long transaction, refused to pick up its messages despite
> prodding. But ISTM that means we just need to pick a few strategic spots
> that will call CHECK_FOR_NOTIFICATIONS() even in the middle of a
> transaction and store them locally.

Sounds good.

Regards, Dave.

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2007-03-26 18:56:37
Subject: Re: Time to package 8.2.4
Previous:From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2007-03-26 18:40:13
Subject: Re: Guarenteeing complex referencial integrity through custom triggers

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