Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joachim Wieland
Subject Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees
Date
Msg-id dc7b844e1002160503t255b97c1n8a545eced38e0673@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY and notification timing guarantees
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
> Tom Lane  wrote:
>> We could adopt the historical policy of sending self-notifies
>> pre-commit, but that doesn't seem tremendously appetizing from the
>> standpoint of transactional integrity.
>
> But one traditional aspect of transactional integrity is that a
> transaction always sees *its own* uncommitted work.

True but notifications aren't sent until the transaction commits
anyway. At the time when an application receives its self-notifies, it
has already committed the transaction so there is no uncommitted work
anymore.


> Wouldn't the
> historical policy of PostgreSQL self-notifies be consistent with
> that?

No. The policy is also to not see the committed work if for some
reason the transaction had to roll back during commit. In this case
we'd also expect getting no notification from this transaction at all
and this is what is violated here.


Joachim


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hitoshi Harada
Date:
Subject: Re: ToDo: plpgsql plugin for query and expression verification
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: OpenVMS?