2012/11/30 Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com> > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg Sabino Mullane [mailto:g...@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 client that 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. > We need pg_listening_channels() because the information it returns should be stored in the DB and applications (libraries) does not need to store it in special places.
> Regards, > Igor Neyman > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general > -- // Dmitriy.
