| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, jacques klein <jacques(dot)klei(at)googlemail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: NOTIFY in Background Worker |
| Date: | 2015-11-05 17:57:41 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYW89ZBJwdSxUiH_n6bXixs-xEhK4ryTq50h9sJNEi=Lw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Haribabu Kommi
<kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I marked this patch as ready for committer.
The patch says:
If a background worker registers to receive asynchronous notifications
with the <command>LISTEN</command> through <acronym>SPI</acronym>,
there is currently no way for incoming notifications to be received.
But wouldn't it be more correct to say:
If a background worker registers to receive asynchronous notifications
with the <command>LISTEN</command> through <acronym>SPI</acronym>, the
worker will log those notifications, but there is no programmatic way
for the worker to intercept and respond to those notifications.
Or something like that?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2015-11-05 18:02:30 | Re: Request: pg_cancel_backend variant that handles 'idle in transaction' sessions |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-11-05 17:51:21 | Re: Bitmap index scans use of filters on available columns |