Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state
Date
Msg-id 23501.1260113029@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Cancelling idle in transaction state  (Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 07:58 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> Thanks. Looks like good input. With the further clarification that we
>> use NOTIFY it seems a solution is forming.

> If we use notify, then "the sufficiently smart client" (tm)  should
> probably declared that it is waiting for such notify , no ?

We are using NOTICE, not NOTIFY, assuming that we use anything at all
(which I still regard as unnecessary).  Please stop injecting confusion
into the discussion.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PageIndexTupleDelete
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing DML RULEs that produce Read Only actions during RO xacts