| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fixing LISTEN/NOTIFY |
| Date: | 2005-10-08 20:40:43 |
| Message-ID: | 20051008204043.GS36108@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 10:30:24AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
> > It might make sense to change the semantics so that we never lose a
> > notification, if we're going to implement NOTIFY 'msg', but that's another
> > discussion.
>
> That's pretty much a given --- the ability to pass some payload data in
> notifications has been on the TODO list for a very long time. I don't
> think we're going to reimplement listen/notify without adding it.
Maybe I'm missing something, but is it possible to ensure notifications
aren't lost using Heikki's method, since everything's only in shared
memory? Or is the idea that stuff would not survive a backend crash?
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-10-08 20:57:36 | Re: Vote needed: revert beta2 changes or not? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-08 19:36:01 | Re: [HACKERS] Kerberos brokenness and oops question in 8.1beta2 |