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

Re: notification payloads

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: notification payloads
Date: 2007-03-27 11:11:03
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> So perhaps it Alvaros proposal can be rephrased thus:
> "Why have the name on each message? The names are already stored in
> listen table, just reuse numeric identifier pointing to item in that
> table. That gives you room for a lot more messages."
> If there is no name in listen table, it means that nobody is interested
> and the message can be dropped right away.

Er, what listen table? The only thing that will be in shared memory is a 
queue and some bookkeeping (queue head per backend). Each backend will 
be responsible for catching the notifications it is interested in and 
discarding the rest (see earlier discussion).



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: alfranio correia juniorDate: 2007-03-27 11:11:49
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] As proposed the complete changes to pg_trigger and pg_rewrite
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-03-27 11:06:30
Subject: Re: notification payloads

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