Re: NOTIFY in Background Worker - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Haribabu Kommi
Subject Re: NOTIFY in Background Worker
Date
Msg-id CAJrrPGebiVxJL5tnORBpjmgmo5VckMzqz1dHtNjr=unAJ7pDfA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: NOTIFY in Background Worker  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: NOTIFY in Background Worker  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 9:03 AM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 10:30 PM, jacques klein
>> <jacques.klei@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I added a "NOFITY chan" to the SQL arg of an SPI_execute(), (I did it
>>> also with just the NOTIFY statement),
>>> but the listeners (other workers) don't get the notification until a
>>> "NOTIFY chan" is done for example with pgadmin,
>>>
>>> They don't get lost, just not emited after the "not forgotten" call of
>>> CommitTransactionCommand().
>>>
>>> Is this normal ( i.e. not supported (yet) ), a bug, or did I overlook
>>> some doc. (or source code) ?.
>>>
>>> For now, I will try to "emit" the NOTIFY via libpq.
>>
>>
>> That's because ProcessCompletedNotifies isn't being called.  For regular
>> backends it is called inside the top level loop PostgresMain.  I think you
>> need to include "commands/async.h" and add a call to
>> ProcessCompletedNotifies() after your background worker commits to make this
>> work.
>
>
> For the record, Jacques confirmed off-list that this worked, and I also did
> a couple of tests.
>
> Is this expected?  If so, should it be documented -- perhaps with something
> like the attached?  Alternatively there may be some way to make
> CommitTransactionCommand do it, though the comments in
> ProcessCompletedNotifies explain why that was rejected, at least as far as
> AtCommit_Notify goes.
>
> This made me wonder what happens if a background worker calls LISTEN.
> NotifyMyFrontEnd simply logs the notifications, since there is no remote
> libpq to sent a message to.  Perhaps a way of delivering to background
> workers could be developed, though of course there are plenty of other kinds
> of IPC available already.

With this commit - bde39eed0cafb82bc94c40e95d96b5cf47b6f719, it is not possible
to execute Notify commands inside a parallel worker. Can't we change
it as disable
both listen and notify commands inside a background worker?

Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rajeev rastogi
Date:
Subject: Re: Dangling Client Backend Process
Next
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Rework access method interface