Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter?

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Tristan Partin <tristan(at)partin(dot)io>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Improve the granularity of PQsocketPoll's timeout parameter?
Date: 2024-06-11 06:27:30
Message-ID: 6f2f4c0f09867cd7bb56742fd43f2b6f624d8325.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 2024-06-11 at 00:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm not that thrilled with inventing a new time type just for this,
> either.  However, time_t is not very fit for purpose, so do you
> have a different suggestion?

No, I don't have a great alternative, so I don't object to your
solutions for f5e4dedfa8.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stepan Neretin 2024-06-11 06:32:04 Re: Sort functions with specialized comparators
Previous Message Andrey M. Borodin 2024-06-11 06:26:38 Re: Issue with the PRNG used by Postgres