Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full
От | Chris Browne |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 871vjub66g.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
greg@turnstep.com ("Greg Sabino Mullane") writes: >> BTW, did we discuss the issue of 2PC transactions versus notify? >> The current behavior of 2PC with notify is pretty cheesy and will >> become more so if we make this change --- you aren't really >> guaranteed that the notify will happen, even though the prepared >> transaction did commit. I think it might be better to disallow >> NOTIFY inside a prepared xact. > > That's a tough one. On the one hand, simply stating that NOTIFY and 2PC > don't play together in the docs would be a straightforward solution > (and not a bad one, as 2PC is already rare and delicate and should not > be used lightly). But what I really don't like the is the idea of a > notify that *may* work or may not - so let's keep it boolean: it either > works 100% of the time with 2PC, or doesn't at all. Should we throw > a warning or error if a client attempts to combine the two? +1 from me... It should either work, or not work, as opposed to something nondeterministic. While it's certainly a nice thing for features to be orthogonal, and for interactions to "just work," I can see making a good case for NOTIFY and 2PC not playing together. -- select 'cbbrowne' || '@' || 'gmail.com'; http://linuxfinances.info/info/slony.html Why isn't phonetic spelled the way it sounds?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: