Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional
От | Filip Rembiałkowski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAP_rww=aTu4MLPxXapUqBotSme1msr6m9st3iPSTd+fQoY4vNQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote: > I wonder if the third argument > should be a boolean however. If we make it 'text, 'send mode', > instead, we could leave some room for more specialization of the > queuing behavior. > > For example, we've had a couple of requests over the years to have an > 'immediate' mode which dumps the notification immediately to the > client without waiting for tx commit. This may or may not be a good > idea, but if it was ultimately proved to be, it could be introduced as > an alternate mode without adding an extra function. But then it becomes disputable if SQL syntax change makes sense. ---we had this,NOTIFY channel [ , payload ] ---and in this patch we have this NOTIFY [ ALL | DISTINCT ] channel [ , payload ]--- but maybe we should have this? NOTIFY channel [ , payload [ , mode ] ] I'm not sure which direction is better with non-standard SQL additions. Recycling keywords or adding more commas?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: