Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Filip Rembiałkowski <filip(dot)rembialkowski(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional
Date: 2016-02-08 23:15:12
Message-ID: CAHyXU0zf-nFfpkHHw7Lme-OPJJ5j4sNs2kSCK9=YUURUB8zU5Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Filip Rembiałkowski
<filip(dot)rembialkowski(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Here is my next try, after suggestions from -perf and -hackers list:
>
> * no GUC
>
> * small addition to NOTIFY grammar: NOTIFY ALL/DISTINCT
>
> * corresponding, 3-argument version of pg_notify(text,text,bool)

This is all sounding pretty good. I wonder if the third argument
should be a boolean however. If we make it 'text, 'send mode',
instead, we could leave some room for more specialization of the
queuing behavior.

For example, we've had a couple of requests over the years to have an
'immediate' mode which dumps the notification immediately to the
client without waiting for tx commit. This may or may not be a good
idea, but if it was ultimately proved to be, it could be introduced as
an alternate mode without adding an extra function.

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-02-08 23:47:18 Re: a raft of parallelism-related bug fixes
Previous Message Corey Huinker 2016-02-08 23:05:01 Re: enable parallel query by default?