Re: TODO-item: Add sleep() function, remove from regress.c

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: TODO-item: Add sleep() function, remove from regress.c
Date: 2006-01-11 04:14:46
Message-ID: 3645.24.211.165.134.1136952886.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane said:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>>> Won't this result in a call to pg_sleep with a long sleep time ending
>>> up sleeping noticeably longer than requested?
>
>> Looks like it to me.
>
> Something on the order of 1% longer, hm? (1 extra clock tick per
> second, probably.) Can't get excited about it --- *all*
> implementations of sleep say that the time is minimum not exact.
>

Well yes, although it's cumulative. I guess I'm not excited for a different
reason - I'm having trouble imagining much of a use case.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-01-11 05:08:45 Re: Is Optimizer smart enough?
Previous Message Tony Caduto 2006-01-11 03:52:20 Re: Question about Postgresql time fields(possible bug)

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2006-01-11 19:46:02 mbutils.c memory cxt cleanup
Previous Message Tony Caduto 2006-01-11 03:52:20 Re: Question about Postgresql time fields(possible bug)