Re: A method to asynchronously LISTEN ?

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 at 05:47, Philippe Ebersohl <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello,
> I do not think there is a need for something like conn.listenSync().
> We were just intrigued about the test.
>
> In fact the current proposition should just work fine and we would like to
> test it.
> How could we have access to a postgresql-*.jdbc.jar that includes this
> feature ?
>
> Regards,
> Philippe
>

I just rebased it over the current code
https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/579
You should be able to build it manually using the commandline instructions
to get the pull

git checkout -b davecramer-notify master
git pull https://github.com/davecramer/pgjdbc.git notify

then use maven to build it


Dave Cramer

[email protected]
www.postgresintl.com



>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"David G. Johnston" <[email protected]>
> *To: *"Dave Cramer" <[email protected]>
> *Cc: *"Philippe Ebersohl" <[email protected]>, "List" <
> [email protected]>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, 26 February, 2019 22:17:12
> *Subject: *Re: A method to asynchronously LISTEN ?
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 12:04 PM Dave Cramer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 12:29, David G. Johnston <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> The question being asked is whether executeUpdate method performs
>>> synchronous execution of the listener function queue during its execution.
>>>
>>> This after sending the command to the server and the server completing
>>> execution of the NOTIFY.  This assumes that the server places the
>>> notification on the channel for pick-up immediately (which will not be the
>>> case within a transaction).
>>>
>>> While the client is, IIRC, synchronous, thus the local order of
>>> operations can be controlled, the server is asynchronous and thus this test
>>> is exposed to timing issues.  Maybe we need something like
>>> conn.listenSync() that blocks until a notification payload is received on
>>> the connection...?
>>>
>>
>> kind of defeats the asynchronous aspect, no ?
>>
>>>
>>>>>
> You'd still want an asynchronous API for people but JavaScript introduced
> the "async/await" feature for a reason.  In this case making it "sync"
> instead of coding up wait loop seems desirable.  That said its quite
> possible I'm missing some existing feature as I haven't used this API at
> all.
>
> David J.
>
>
> [image: Visit us on EuroDUO 2019 in Lisbon] <https://euroduo.dalim.com/>
>