> From: Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Need some advice on appropriate PL strategy... > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > "Eric D. Nielsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I guess I could alternatively just code up a simple mail function in > another PL > > and then call that function from pl/pgsql. Is there any merit to this > approach > > over the "whole-trigger" in another PL method? > > Well depending on your application this may be a reasonable approach. > However > you should at least think carefully before taking this route. It means the > email processing is put into the critical path of performing the original > update. > > I would suggest you consider another model, where you have a second process > that connects to the database and checks for updates. It can either stay > connected all the time and the trigger can use NOTIFY to wake it up. Or it > can > just check periodically. This has the advantage that you can write in any > language that has a postgres driver, including PHP. > > It also means you can perform your database updates without having them > depend > on some large external system. This is a big advantage. It means when the > mail > system's borked you can keep your web application running and have it catch > up > when things are fixed. And it means when things are slow or erroneous you > have > one fewer moving parts to confuse you when debugging.
Hmm, very good points. Thank you. I was hoping for a get/easy solution, but those never pan out :) Your suggestion is also much more flexible -- digesting or other similar aggregation of multiple events to single emails is much easier to implement in that scenario. Thanks again. Eric ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match