Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional
От | Filip Rembiałkowski |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAP_rwwng-PBcVuNrerH=s7yHdZWFJ1-CYvqBYJv=0493PK+cgg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional (Vik Fearing <vik@2ndquadrant.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: make NOTIFY list de-duplication optional
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Vik Fearing <vik@2ndquadrant.fr> wrote: > On 02/07/2016 03:42 AM, Filip Rembiałkowski wrote: > You left the duplicate behavior with subtransactions, but didn't mention > it in the documentation. If I do NOTIFY DISTINCT chan, 'msg'; then I > expect only distinct notifications but I'll get duplicates if I'm in a > subtransaction. Either the documentation or the code needs to be fixed. agreed > > I seem to remember some discussion about not using DEFAULT parameters in > system functions so you should leave the old function alone and create a > new function with your use_all parameter. I don't recall the exact > reason why so hopefully someone else will enlighten me. I'm quite new to this; how do I pinpoint proper OID for a new catalog object (function, in this case)? Is there a better way than browsing fmgr files and guessing next available oid? > > There is also no mention in the documentation about what happens if I do: > > NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; > NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; > NOTIFY DISTINCT chan, 'msg'; > NOTIFY ALL chan, 'msg'; > > Without testing, I'd say I'd get two messages, but it should be > explicitly mentioned somewhere. If it's four separate transactions, LISTEN'er should get four. If it's in one transaction, LISTEN'er should get three. > -- > Vik Fearing +33 6 46 75 15 36 > http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: