Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How will we know then that all listeners have received their events ?
We won't, but we don't know that now. In both the current
implementation and this proposed one, the most you can tell is whether a
backend has absorbed an event notification, not whet
Hannu Krosing wrote:
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 16:00 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I am working on moving the notification buffer into shared memory as
previously discussed. Since pg_listener will no longer exist, I think we
need to provide a couple of information functions.
I suggest:
pg_li
On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 16:00 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I am working on moving the notification buffer into shared memory as
> previously discussed. Since pg_listener will no longer exist, I think we
> need to provide a couple of information functions.
>
> I suggest:
>
> pg_listened_events(o
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I suggest:
pg_listened_events(out event name) returns setof record
pg_pending_events(out event name, out message text) returns setof record
The first would show events being listened on by the current backend,
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suggest:
> pg_listened_events(out event name) returns setof record
> pg_pending_events(out event name, out message text) returns setof record
> The first would show events being listened on by the current backend,
> while the second would show all
I am working on moving the notification buffer into shared memory as
previously discussed. Since pg_listener will no longer exist, I think we
need to provide a couple of information functions.
I suggest:
pg_listened_events(out event name) returns setof record
pg_pending_events(out event nam
