Re: [GENERAL] Notify argument?

On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 00:16, Tom Lane wrote:
> nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway) writes:
> >> If we're going to change the structure anyway, let's fix it to be
> >> independent of NAMEDATALEN.
> 
> > Sounds good. If we're making other backwards-incompatible changes to
> > pgNotify, one thing that bugs me about the API is the use of "relname"
> > to refer to name of the NOTIFY/LISTEN condition.
> 
> I hear you ... but my proposal only requires a recompile, *not* any
> source code changes.  Renaming the field would break client source code.
> I doubt it's worth that.

Okay, that's fair -- I'll leave it as it is.

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC