listen/notify vs. sequence-model
От | pilsl@goldfisch.at |
---|---|
Тема | listen/notify vs. sequence-model |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20030407153604.GA10802@goldfisch.at обсуждение исходный текст |
Список | pgsql-general |
for a caching-application I need to implement an indicator if my table has been changed. I will create three rules (insert, update, delete) and then imho there are two ways to continue: I could simply send notifies on changes and my application listen to the notify or I could increment a sequence and the application queries and memorize the value of the sequence. The solution with the sequence would have the big advantage that the application must not keep the db-handle open all the time. (the solution would work with cgi also and not only with mod_perl in my case) My question is, if the sequence-model has very poor performance compared to the listen/notify-modell. I need three rules in both models. In the first case I need to send and listen a notify. In the second case I need to update and query a sequence. thnx, peter ps: are rules executed when the current transaction is closed or immediately after the corresponding statement ? -- mag. peter pilsl IT-Consulting tel: +43-699-1-3574035 fax: +43-699-4-3574035 pilsl@goldfisch.at http://www.goldfisch.at
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: