| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Listen / Notify rewrite |
| Date: | 2009-11-12 02:28:32 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150911111828n18cdb268i2aca9d971d3a0394@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:48 PM, A.M. <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> wrote:
> At least with this new payload, I can set the payload to the transaction ID
> and be certain that all the notifications I sent are processed (and in order
> even!) but could you explain why the coalescing is still necessary?
Christmas comes early this year! :-).
three reasons:
*) it works that way now...a lot of people use this feature for all
kinds of subtle things and the behavior chould change as little as
possible
*) legacy issues aside, I think it's generally better behavior (how
many times do you need to be tapped on the shoulder?)
*) since you can trivially differentiate it (using xid, sequence,
etc), what's the fuss?
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2009-11-12 02:31:41 | write ahead logging in standby (streaming replication) |
| Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2009-11-12 02:21:33 | Re: Listen / Notify rewrite |