From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Cory Tucker <cory(dot)tucker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Asynchronous Trigger? |
Date: | 2018-04-27 15:59:11 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0wHfetV7eMBWEtbM=wFZcARUkbq8Q9kV1PcX09oVPjk2w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 5:29 PM, Cory Tucker <cory(dot)tucker(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is it possible to have the execution of a trigger (or any function) not
> block the completion of the statement they are associated with?
>
> A pattern I had hoped to implement was to do a quick update of rows that
> signaled they needed attention, and then an async per-row trigger would come
> and do the maintenance (in this case, make an expensive materialized view).
>
> Any suggestions welcome.
Generally the idea is to (in the trigger) invoke some low risk quick
action such as inserting a record in to a 'stuff to do' table. Then,
some other process comes around and does the heavy lifting.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) | 2018-04-27 16:13:32 | Re: Rationale for aversion to the central database? |
Previous Message | Guyren Howe | 2018-04-27 15:46:33 | Re: Rationale for aversion to the central database? |