Re: Sleep functions

From: Michael Adler <adler(at)pobox(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sleep functions
Date: 2005-08-22 13:30:23
Message-ID: 20050822133022.GA25930@pobox.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 09:13:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> writes:
> > What do people think of exposing pg_usleep() to the user?
>
> I'm not real enthused about it. Generally speaking, a sleep() on the
> database side means you are idling while holding locks, and that does
> not seem like something we want to encourage people to do.
>
> As other responders noted, it's trivial to program this in any of the
> untrusted PL languages, So what you're really proposing is that we give
> sleep() to non-superusers, and that seems like a bit of a hard sell.
> Let's see a use-case or three.

There may be a better alternative, but wouldn't this let application
writers easily test the effects of a long running transaction?

-Mike

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Palle Girgensohn 2005-08-22 13:49:16 Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-22 13:19:58 Re: Win32 unicode vs ICU