On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Chris Angelico <rosuav@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PGQ_Tutorial >> >> PGQ looks promising, but I can't afford the risk of losing calls in >> the event that there are no workers to process them (the correct >> action is for them simply to languish in the database until one is >> started up). > PGQ does not lose events - after consumer registers > on the queue it is guaranteed to see all events. > > So it's a matter of registering your consumers > before anything interesting happens in database. > The actual consumers do not need to be running > at that moment. Ah, I think I understand. So registering a consumer simply means registering its textual name. I was under the impression that it registered the session/connection it was on. PGQ may still be unsuitable (it's more geared toward replication than a shared-workload scenario), but that's my primary concern solved. ChrisA -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
