Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> writes: > The problem with this (which I basically agree with) is that this will > greatly increase the size of the queue for all participants of this > feature if they use the payload or not. I think it boils down to > this: is there a reasonably effective way of making the payload > variable length (now or in the future)? If not, let's compromise and > maybe go with a larger size, maybe 256 or 512 bytes.
Yeah, if the payload is not variable length then we are not going to be able to make it more than a couple hundred bytes without taking a significant performance hit. (By the way, has anyone yet tried to compare the speed of this implementation to the old code?) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers