Hi Filip,
On 2/20/16 8:00 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 10:09 PM, Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin@gmail.com
> On 2/9/16, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>>
> wrote:
> > FWIW, I think it would be a good thing if the NOTIFY statement syntax were
> > not remarkably different from the syntax used in the pg_notify() function
> > call. To do otherwise would certainly be confusing. So on the whole
> > I'd go with the "NOTIFY channel [ , payload [ , mode ] ]" option.
>
> Filip, do you agree with Tom's proposal? Do you plan to rework the
> patch on these lines? If you are I'll try to review it, if not I could
> give it a shot as I'm interested in having this in 9.6.
>
> I see that Tom's remarks give more flexibility, and your refinement
> makes sense.
It looks like we are waiting on a new patch from you before this can be
reviewed. Are you close to having that done?
Meanwhile, I have marked it "Waiting on Author".
--
-David
david@pgmasters.net
