Re: Notify enhancement

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Notify enhancement
Date: 2006-12-04 02:34:00
Message-ID: 1867.1165199640@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Incidentally, I think we will also need to limit the length of the message
> string if we're going to store this in shared memory. I'm currently
> thinking of NAMEDATALEN per message, but I am open to argument.

I suppose you're envisioning a ring of fixed-size message buffers
similar to the sinval implementation. With two NAMEDATALEN items
per message this would be 128 bytes each, a lot of which would go unused
in typical applications ... but on the other hand I can foresee some
apps wishing they could send payload strings longer than NAMEDATALEN.

Seems like it would not be that much harder to allow variable-length
messages, remove the padding and avoid any hard limit on message size.
You'd have to track the "fill" and "empty" pointers at the level of
bytes not message numbers, but so what?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2006-12-04 05:38:09 Re: Double entries in log for page slots in beta3
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-12-04 01:49:04 Re: Notify enhancement