On Mon, 2005-05-09 at 17:01 -0400, Douglas McNaught wrote:
> 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.
How is writing a daemon simpler than using something that could be done
within Postgres? Forking is something that should be natural to Unix
systems, I shouldn't need to write another application to do this. I
don't see how a daemon would necessarily be more robust either.
Cheers,
Chris
--
Christopher Murtagh
Enterprise Systems Administrator
ISR / Web Service Group
McGill University
Montreal, Quebec
Canada
Tel.: (514) 398-3122
Fax: (514) 398-2017
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
