On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > Really? Even pg_dump cares? Or your maintainence scripts > (VACUUM/ANALYZE)? Ok, those clients don't, but you rarely have many vacuum/pg_dump processes going on at the same time, so storing the events for them and throwing them away is not that big of a deal imho. > I'd have to disagree though. In most of the systems I've worked with > the database is in the center of the system. It'd be access by CGI > scripts, cron job, batch jobs started by a person, load triggered by > emails, etc. These may all use very different methods of accessing the > database. Even if an application used LISTEN/NOTIFY, I can't imagine > any bulk load/store being interested. Hmm, maybe you are right:) Maybe a new implementation should be able to do both. That way you could set the timetravel option on the begin statement: begin listen now So transactions that like to get all events they listen for during the transaction can and everybody else will get only events that happen after they commit.
