Re: Trigger that spawns forked process
От | Christopher Murtagh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Trigger that spawns forked process |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1115687260.4795.6.camel@mafalda.corporateunderground.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Trigger that spawns forked process (Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Trigger that spawns forked process
Re: Trigger that spawns forked process |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 17:01 -0400, Douglas McNaught wrote: > Why not have a client connection LISTENing and doing the > synchronization, and have the trigger use NOTIFY? > > Or, you could have the trigger write to a table, and have another > client periodically scanning the table for new sync events. > > Either one of those would be simpler and more robust than fork()ing > inside the backend. How is writing a daemon simpler than using something that could be done within Postgres? Forking is something that should be natural to Unix systems, I shouldn't need to write another application to do this. I don't see how a daemon would necessarily be more robust either. Cheers, Chris -- Christopher Murtagh Enterprise Systems Administrator ISR / Web Service Group McGill University Montreal, Quebec Canada Tel.: (514) 398-3122 Fax: (514) 398-2017
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: