Re: NOTIFY docs fixup - emit and deliver consistency - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: NOTIFY docs fixup - emit and deliver consistency
Date
Msg-id 805928.1601434736@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to NOTIFY docs fixup - emit and deliver consistency  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: NOTIFY docs fixup - emit and deliver consistency  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> Over in [1] Greg got confused by some wording in our NOTIFY documentation.
> The attached patch uses "emits" and "delivered" more consistently (in
> lieu of "processed" in the complained of location).

Meh --- I do not think "emitted" is much of an improvement over "sent".
(I agree it's not great that these two places don't use matching
terminology, though.)  Neither is clear as to where the message is
sent or emitted.

As for the other end of it, I don't like "delivered" because it presumes
that the processing action necessarily is to send the message to the
connected client.  When a backend takes a message off the queue, it may
just drop it on the floor because its client is not listening to that
channel.  Nonetheless, until it's done so that message must consume
queue space.

Maybe we could use terminology along the lines of "added to the
queue" and "removed from the queue"?

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: pg_proc.dat "proargmodes is not a 1-D char array"
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Use PG_FINALLY to simplify code