Re: LISTEN considered dangerous - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Flemming Frandsen
Subject Re: LISTEN considered dangerous
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0608041106410.18488-100000@partyticket.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: LISTEN considered dangerous  (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:

> Really? Even pg_dump cares? Or your maintainence scripts
> (VACUUM/ANALYZE)?

Ok, those clients don't, but you rarely have many vacuum/pg_dump
processes going on at the same time, so storing the events for them and
throwing them away is not that big of a deal imho.


> I'd have to disagree though. In most of the systems I've worked with
> the database is in the center of the system. It'd be access by CGI
> scripts, cron job, batch jobs started by a person, load triggered by
> emails, etc. These may all use very different methods of accessing the
> database. Even if an application used LISTEN/NOTIFY, I can't imagine
> any bulk load/store being interested.

Hmm, maybe you are right:)

Maybe a new implementation should be able to do both.

That way you could set the timetravel option on the begin statement:
begin listen now

So transactions that like to get all events they listen for during the
transaction can and everybody else will get only events that happen after
they commit.



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: Locale/encoding problem/question
Next
From: henka@cityweb.co.za
Date:
Subject: Re: Locale/encoding problem/question