Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Denis A Ustimenko <denis(at)oldham(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
Date: 2002-10-16 15:02:05
Message-ID: 24412.1034780525@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Still, one could ask why we are expending extra cycles to make the
>> timeout more accurate. Who the heck needs an accurate timeout on
>> connect? Can you really give a use-case where the user won't have
>> picked a number out of the air anyway?

> I think we do need to properly compute the timeout on an EINTR of
> select() because if we don't, a 30 second timeout could become 90
> seconds if select() is interrupted. The other time() calls are needed,
> one above the loop, and one inside the loop.

AFAICS we need one time() call at the start, and then one inside the
select loop. I haven't looked at your recent patches, but you said
something about putting two calls in the loop; that seems like overkill.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-16 15:02:10 Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-16 15:01:33 Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c