Talk:Database-as-IPC

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Database-as-IPC article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Computing: Software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Insufficient detail and authority[edit]

Database-as-IPC is not well defined in the article. It provides insufficient detail as to what is meant by using a database as an IPC mechanism. Databases share information between processes as a matter of course. Do they not then provide inter-process communication as part of their design?

In addition, what organizations with credibility within the computing community actually believe that whatever this article is on about is a problem at all?

This article has the smell of arbitrary opinion.

Postgresql provides an inter-process mechanism using LISTEN and NOTIFY commands. Is this also considered part of the asserted problem? ^[1]

Chairman wiggy (talk) 17:40, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/sql-notify.html

[1] ttps://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/sql-notify.html

[1]