Re: Spec discussion: Generalized Data Queue / Modification Trigger
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Spec discussion: Generalized Data Queue / Modification Trigger |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4B8EBE14.8020000@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Spec discussion: Generalized Data Queue / Modification Trigger (Greg Sabino Mullane <greg@endpoint.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Spec discussion: Generalized Data
Queue / Modification Trigger
|
Список | pgsql-cluster-hackers |
Greg, >> (1) The ability to send asynchronous (or synchronous?) notifications, on >> a per-row basis, whenever data is modified *only after commit*. This >> has been generally described as "on-commit triggers", but could actually >> take a variety of forms. > > I'm not sure I like the idea of this. Could be potentially dangerous, as > listen/notify is not treated as a "reliable" process. What's wrong with > the current method, namely having a row trigger update an internal > table, and then a statement level trigger firing off a notify? Well, the main problem with that is that it doubles the number of writes you have to do ... or more. So it's a major efficiency issue. This isn't as much of a concern for a system like Slony or Londiste where the replication queue is a table in the database. But if you were, say, replicating through ApacheMQ? Or replicating cached data to Redis? Then the whole queue-table, NOTIFY, poll structure is needless overhead. >> (3) A method of marking DDL changes in the data modification stream. > > Hmm..can you expand on what you have in mind here? Something more than > just treating the DDL as another item in the (txn ordered) queue? Yeah, that would be one way to handle it. Alternately, you could have the ability to mark rows with a DDL "version". --Josh Berkus
В списке pgsql-cluster-hackers по дате отправления: