Re: LISTEN vs. two-phase commit

Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc> writes:
> ... I think the transaction overhead, and 
> attempts to re-use PostgreSQL tables to implement LISTEN/NOTIFY to be 
> clever but mis-guided.

Oh, I don't disagree with you.  As I already mentioned, they desperately
need to be rewritten.  However, given that that's not a sanely
back-patchable answer, we have to consider what are the appropriate
semantics for the existing infrastructure.

(Also, if they *were* memory-based then the question of their relation
to 2PC semantics becomes even more urgent.)
        regards, tom lane