Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax

Trey Boudreau <trey(at)treysoft(dot)com> writes:
> so I'd like to propose a 'LISTEN *' equivalent to 'UNLISTEN *'.

Seems reasonable in the abstract, and given the UNLISTEN * precedent
it's hard to quibble with that syntax choice. I think what actually
needs discussing are the semantics, specifically how this'd interact
with other LISTEN/UNLISTEN actions. Explain what you think should
be the behavior after:

LISTEN foo;
LISTEN *;
UNLISTEN *;
-- are we still listening on foo?

LISTEN *;
LISTEN foo;
UNLISTEN *;
-- how about now?

LISTEN *;
UNLISTEN foo;
-- how about now?

LISTEN *;
LISTEN foo;
UNLISTEN foo;
-- does that make a difference?

I don't have any strong preferences about this, but we ought to
have a clear idea of the behavior we want before we start coding.

regards, tom lane