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

Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: tomas(at)fabula(dot)de
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, matthew(dot)copeland(at)honeywell(dot)com
Subject: Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented
Date: 2001-09-07 04:30:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugspgsql-hackers
tomas(at)fabula(dot)de writes:
> My pattern of use for ``CREATE RULE... NOTIFY...'' was, up to now, to get
> a notice when anything changed on a table and then go look what happened;
> a `poor man's statement level trigger' if you wish. Thus, the old behavior
> didn't bother me that much. I don't know how others are using it.

Yeah, that is the normal and recommended usage pattern for NOTIFY, so
getting a NOTIFY when nothing actually happened is fairly harmless.
(Undoubtedly that's why no one complained before.)

Changing the rewriter to error out when it couldn't really Do The Right
Thing seemed like a good idea at the time, but now it seems clear that
this didn't do anything to enhance the usefulness of the system.  Unless
someone objects, I'll change it back for 7.2.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-09-07 04:32:33
Subject: Beta Monday?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-09-07 04:30:24
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] JDBC pg_description update needed for CVS tip

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Larry RosenmanDate: 2001-09-07 04:37:53
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/utils/mb encnames.c win1251. ...
Previous:From: tomasDate: 2001-09-07 04:10:01
Subject: Re: Conditional NOTIFY is not implemented

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group