| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jeroen T(dot) Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: psql patch |
| Date: | 2003-02-24 17:36:56 |
| Message-ID: | 4385.1046108216@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
"Jeroen T. Vermeulen" <jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl> writes:
> 3. It would be a little extra work, but perhaps not undoable, to keep
> track of whether the client is actually listening on any triggers.
Not without help from the backend --- you have no idea whether a LISTEN
command might have been executed via some user-defined function.
> Similarly, there's no need to
> poll while inside a transaction because no notifications will be
> delivered in that state.
Again, it's not all that easy to be sure if you're inside a transaction
or not. We looked at this and decided it was impractical to do without
a protocol addition.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2003-02-24 18:13:43 | Re: psql patch |
| Previous Message | Jeroen T. Vermeulen | 2003-02-24 17:27:57 | Re: psql patch |