| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Chernow <andrew(at)esilo(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Listen / Notify rewrite |
| Date: | 2009-11-13 16:08:25 |
| Message-ID: | 3514.1258128505@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The problem with this (which I basically agree with) is that this will
> greatly increase the size of the queue for all participants of this
> feature if they use the payload or not. I think it boils down to
> this: is there a reasonably effective way of making the payload
> variable length (now or in the future)? If not, let's compromise and
> maybe go with a larger size, maybe 256 or 512 bytes.
Yeah, if the payload is not variable length then we are not going to be
able to make it more than a couple hundred bytes without taking a
significant performance hit. (By the way, has anyone yet tried to
compare the speed of this implementation to the old code?)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-11-13 16:10:00 | Re: next CommitFest |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2009-11-13 16:00:07 | Re: Experimental patch: generating BKI revisited |