| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? |
| Date: | 2002-03-21 05:16:52 |
| Message-ID: | 10388.1016687812@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) writes:
>> If we're going to change the structure anyway, let's fix it to be
>> independent of NAMEDATALEN.
> Sounds good. If we're making other backwards-incompatible changes to
> pgNotify, one thing that bugs me about the API is the use of "relname"
> to refer to name of the NOTIFY/LISTEN condition.
I hear you ... but my proposal only requires a recompile, *not* any
source code changes. Renaming the field would break client source code.
I doubt it's worth that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-03-21 05:19:47 | Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-03-21 05:14:53 | Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-03-21 05:19:47 | Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-03-21 05:14:53 | Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? |