Re: Again, sorry, caching.

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Copeland <greg(at)CopelandConsulting(dot)Net>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Again, sorry, caching.
Date: 2002-04-14 17:11:02
Message-ID: 200204141711.g3EHB2c12445@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Also, on the NOTIFY/trigger idea, triggers are called on statement end,
> > not transaction end, so if an UPDATE query is in a multi-statement
> > transaction, another backend looking for the NOTIFY will receive it
> > before the transaction commits, meaning it will not see the update.
>
> No it won't.

Is this because NOTIFY is held for transaction end or because the
triggers are held until transaction commit?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-04-14 17:11:16 Re: bug with current sources? Re: cost of parse/plan/execute for one sample query
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-04-14 17:08:17 Re: Again, sorry, caching.