Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> We'll also need to store the database id along with the event name and
>> message, since pg_listener is per db rather than per cluster.
> Well, that's an artifact of the historical implementation ... does
> anyone want to argue that LISTEN should be cluster-wide given the
That would be a problem if you try to run multiple installations of an
application that uses NOTIFY/LISTEN in separate databases in a single
cluster. Applications would overhear each other. I'd consider that as a
bug, not a feature.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-04-03 18:15:52|
|Subject: Re: Plan invalidation |
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-04-03 17:45:42|
|Subject: Re: notification payloads |