| 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: | Lionel Bouton <lionel-subscription(at)bouton(dot)name>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1588: pg_autovacuum sleep parameter overflow |
| Date: | 2005-05-11 15:41:19 |
| Message-ID: | 4386.1115826079@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-patches |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> However, I am now wondering if we should change pg_usleep() to take a
> double rather than long. This would avoid such problems in the future
> in other places in our code.
I'd leave it alone; there aren't any other places that need long sleeps,
and I don't really expect them. When and if we have a real need for it,
we can change it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-05-11 15:47:27 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1588: pg_autovacuum sleep parameter overflow |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-11 15:40:36 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1588: pg_autovacuum sleep parameter overflow |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-11 15:46:54 | Re: plperl and pltcl installcheck targets |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-11 15:40:36 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1588: pg_autovacuum sleep parameter overflow |