Re: pg_listening_channels()

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Igor Neyman
Тема Re: pg_listening_channels()
Дата
Msg-id A76B25F2823E954C9E45E32FA49D70EC08F06E01@mail.corp.perceptron.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_listening_channels()  ("Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg@turnstep.com>)
Ответы Re: pg_listening_channels()  (Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-general
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Sabino Mullane [mailto:greg@turnstep.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 11:34 PM
> To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: pg_listening_channels()
>
>
> On the contrary, it was very well discussed and designed. Why do you
> even care if the anyone is listening or not? Simply remove the "check
> if anyone listens" step and send the NOTIFY.
>

Well, I guess we disagree on this.

Why trashing the system with NOTIFYs no one listens to?
Of course, like Tom Lane suggested, I could create a table similar to now obsolete pg_listener and manage it from the
clientthat LISTENs and gets notifications. 

Also, what sense pg_listening_channels() function makes, if it returns channels that I created (in my current
session/connection)?  
I don't need this function to know whether I issued LISTEN my_channel or not.

Regards,
Igor Neyman


В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Jeff Janes
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: query performance, though it was timestamps,maybe just table size?
Следующее
От: Henry Drexler
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: query performance, though it was timestamps,maybe just table size?