Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwaOufzPaakBGTuLhk5+MY4MavaTFGp2RmirguMS+c+RAw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax  (Trey Boudreau <trey@treysoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 2:42 PM Trey Boudreau <trey@treysoft.com> wrote:
We could have a different set of keywords, like LISTEN_ALL/UNLISTEN_ALL
that doesn’t interfere with the existing behavior.


I think we will need something along these lines.  We've given * a meaning in UNLISTEN * that doesn't match what this proposal wants to accomplish.

I suggested using monitor/unmonitor but I suppose any unquoted symbol or keyword that is invalid as a channel name would work within the Listen/Unlisten syntax.

Otherwise I mis-spoke in my previous design since regardless of whether Listen * unregisters existing channels or not Unlisten * will remove everything and leave the session back at nothing.  In which case you might as well just remove the redundant channel listeners.

David J.

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax