Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Mielke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
... I think the transaction overhead, and
attempts to re-use PostgreSQL tables to implement LISTEN/NOTIFY to be
clever but mis-guided.
Oh, I don't disagree with you. As I already mentioned, they desperately
need to be rewritten. However, given that that's not a sanely
back-patchable answer, we have to consider what are the appropriate
semantics for the existing infrastructure.
(Also, if they *were* memory-based then the question of their relation
to 2PC semantics becomes even more urgent.)
Ah k - so count my vote as "I don't think LISTEN should be impacted by
what sort of COMMIT I use, but I don't believe I'll be using LISTEN as
it is today, and I definately won't be using it in two-phase commit
today." For me that is "it should be usable in a two-phase commit - but
it's not usable today." Sorry this isn't a clear answer to your question.
Cheers,
mark
--
Mark Mielke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
