Re: listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jeff Davis" <list-pgsql-hackers(at)empires(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: listen/notify argument (old topic revisited)
Date: 2002-07-03 13:30:50
Message-ID: 23983.1025703050@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Is a shared memory implementation going to play silly buggers with the Win32
> port?

No. Certainly no more so than shared disk buffers or the SI message
facility, both of which are *not* optional.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-07-03 13:41:33 Re: Scope of constraint names
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2002-07-03 12:32:30 Re: BETWEEN Node & DROP COLUMN