Re: Listen / Notify rewrite

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Andrew Chernow <andrew(at)esilo(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Listen / Notify rewrite
Date: 2009-11-12 18:38:07
Message-ID: b42b73150911121038i5b9552c3s42770616f44d7165@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, the 128 character limit is simply lame (other than for
> unsolvable implementation/performance complexity which I doubt is the
> case here), and if that constraint is put in by the implementation,
> than the implementation is busted and should be reworked until it's
> right.

After some reflection, I realized this was an overly strong statement
and impolite to the OP. It's easy to yarp from the gallery with the
other peanuts :-). It's not the implementation I have an issue with,
just the _idea_ that we should be restricted to small payloads for
religious reasons...until that came upI was already scheming on how to
both extend the patch to be more flexible in terms of payload size,
and to backpatch and test it on 8.4 (no point if the community has no
interest however). In any event, sorry for the strong words.

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2009-11-12 18:38:19 Re: next CommitFest
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2009-11-12 18:36:54 Re: next CommitFest