| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Marcus Kempe <marcus(at)kempe(dot)cc>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: async notification patch for dblink |
| Date: | 2009-08-04 14:18:11 |
| Message-ID: | 22404.1249395491@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Sure, I guess I ought to use the latest-and-greatest. Any other comments
> before I commit?
That "be_pid/be_pid" hack in the regression test is pretty ugly, and
doesn't test anything very useful anyway seeing that it's integer
division. Could you do something like
be_pid = pg_backend_pid() AS is_self_notify
instead, to verify that it's a self-notify? (This is not quite right
because you'd need to execute pg_backend_pid() at the remote end, but
I'm not awake enough to remember the dblink syntax for that. Maybe
it's too complex to be worth it, but I think demonstrating how to
check for self-notify would be a useful bit of doco.)
Otherwise it looks ok to me.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-08-04 14:19:16 | Re: Alpha releases: How to tag |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-08-04 14:16:45 | Re: doing %-expansion in plpgsql RAISE USING |