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

From Daniel Gustafsson
Subject Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax
Date
Msg-id D65628A3-8670-4885-9EF0-9E67203C3E40@yesql.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> On 20 Dec 2024, at 23:07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> ..it makes "LISTEN *" act the same as though you had somehow explicitly listed
> every possible channel.

When thinking about it while reading this thread, this is what I came up with
as well.  Since the current workings of LISTEN is so well established I can't
see how we could make this anything but a natural extension of the current.

--
Daniel Gustafsson




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Bug: mdunlinkfiletag unlinks mainfork seg.0 instead of indicated fork+segment