Re: Trigger that spawns forked process

Douglas McNaught <doug@mcnaught.org> writes:
> Why not have a client connection LISTENing and doing the
> synchronization, and have the trigger use NOTIFY?
> Or, you could have the trigger write to a table, and have another
> client periodically scanning the table for new sync events.
> Either one of those would be simpler and more robust than fork()ing
> inside the backend.

... not to mention it would avoid the risk of propagating
not-yet-committed changes.

            regards, tom lane