Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument?
Date
Msg-id 1016687988.4573.1.camel@jiro
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 00:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway) writes:
> >> If we're going to change the structure anyway, let's fix it to be
> >> independent of NAMEDATALEN.
> 
> > Sounds good. If we're making other backwards-incompatible changes to
> > pgNotify, one thing that bugs me about the API is the use of "relname"
> > to refer to name of the NOTIFY/LISTEN condition.
> 
> I hear you ... but my proposal only requires a recompile, *not* any
> source code changes.  Renaming the field would break client source code.
> I doubt it's worth that.

Okay, that's fair -- I'll leave it as it is.

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument?
Next
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: FW: Help with SET NULL/SET NOT NULL