| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | danielr(at)neophi(dot)com, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Additional Notes |
| Date: | 2023-11-15 18:05:05 |
| Message-ID: | 2e0ffcb3a67e0ece4dd4de34d33541b12f4e78b7.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 17:38 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
> The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
>
> Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/sql-notify.html
> Description:
>
> It would be good to add to the notes section that use of NOTIFY especially
> within a TRIGGER requires an AccessExclusiveLock which may cause performance
> issues. Old thread for reference:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3598.1363354686%40sss.pgh.pa.us
I don't see what this has to do with triggers. Even deferred triggers run
*before* this notify lock is taken.
The only possibility I see for such a lock to be held for a long time is if
COMMIT spends a long time waiting for a reply from a synchronous standby
server. Is that your problem?
I don't think that would require special documentation, because if your
synchronous standby does not respond in time, you normally have worse
problems than NOTIFY performance.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Roberto Mello | 2023-11-15 23:28:24 | Re: Add minimal C example and SQL registration example for custom table access methods. |
| Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2023-11-15 17:38:32 | Additional Notes |