| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Arnaud Betremieux <arnaud(dot)betremieux(at)keyconsulting(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Cyrille Chépélov <cyrille(dot)chepelov(at)keyconsulting(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full |
| Date: | 2010-01-11 13:25:57 |
| Message-ID: | 27162.1263216357@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Arnaud Betremieux <arnaud(dot)betremieux(at)keyconsulting(dot)fr> writes:
> 3) My use case : NOTIFY channel 'pay'||'load' (actually NOTIFY
> channel '<table_name>#'||OLD.id)
> 4) Taken one step further : NOTIFY channel (SELECT payload FROM payloads
> WHERE ...)
> I'm working on a proof of concept patch to use Joachim's new notify
> function to introduce case 3. I think this means going through the
> planner and executor, so I might as well do case 4 as well.
It would be a lot less work to introduce a function like send_notify()
that could be invoked within a regular SELECT. Pushing a utility
statement through the planner/executor code path will do enough violence
to the system design that such a patch would probably be rejected out of
hand.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2010-01-11 13:34:26 | Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-01-11 13:24:58 | Re: mailing list archiver chewing patches |