Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > No loss, but, per previous discussion, it would block and try to get > other backends to collect their outstanding notifications. > > Let's say we provide 100Kb for this (which is not a heck of a lot) , > that the average notification might be, say, 40 bytes of name plus 60 > bytes of message. Then we have room for about 1000 messages in the > queue. This would get ugly only if backend presumably in the middle of > some very long transaction, refused to pick up its messages despite > prodding. But ISTM that means we just need to pick a few strategic spots > that will call CHECK_FOR_NOTIFICATIONS() even in the middle of a > transaction and store them locally.
Sounds good. Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate