X-Original-To: pgsql-performance-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EE011F61D6 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:44:02 -0300 (ADT) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Score: 0.126 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.126 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.126] Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QmvKGMWtsh+N for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:43:54 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0234311F61BA for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:43:57 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k3E0hsAc002848; Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:43:54 -0400 (EDT) To: PFC cc: "Christian Storm" , "Jim C. Nasby" , "Josh Berkus" , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgmemcache In-reply-to: References: <1144135482.063425.33380@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <20060411225515.GZ49405@pervasive.com> <200604121603.43986.josh@agliodbs.com> <20060413001024.GP49405@pervasive.com> <6236.1144888514@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4D23826E-7325-4946-B79A-80E321E0E497@gmail.com> <26792.1144949880@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to PFC message dated "Thu, 13 Apr 2006 22:23:31 +0200" Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:43:54 -0400 Message-ID: <2847.1144975434@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200604/319 X-Sequence-Number: 18403 PFC writes: > I guess AFTER COMMIT triggers would be like a NOTIFY, but more powerful. I'll let you in on a secret: NOTIFY is actually a before-commit operation. This is good enough because it never, or hardly ever, fails. I would argue that anything you want to do in an AFTER COMMIT trigger could just as well be done in a BEFORE COMMIT trigger; if that's not reliable enough then you need to fix your trigger. regards, tom lane