Re: [Gnumed-devel] address@hidden: Re: [GENERAL] XMIN semantic at peril ?]

[Tim Churches]

Syan Tan wrote:
> you wouldn't need xmin checking if more effort was made by the postgresql 
> people
> to cater
> for caching interactive clients , which would  be a significant group of pg 
> customers
> i would have thought. e.g something like using savepoints, atomic 
> commit/resume
> transaction , the ability to read committed in order to reload , and the 
> ability
> to poll for change notification, so that you don't need another thread to 
> listen
> for notified changes, and you can use read committed to refresh cached values.
> Too much to ask for ? 

Have you actually asked the Postgres maintainers for these things? What
was their response? No point just complaining on this list - you have to
voice your needs on the Postgres lists.

Tim C