| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Date: | 2010-09-09 08:17:18 |
| Message-ID: | 4C88980E.9000503@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/08/2010 08:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Considering that we know that major platforms
> such as FreeBSD have changed their implementations *very* recently,
> it seems foolish to assume that an executable built on a machine with
> corrected pselect could not be run on one with an older implementation.
FWIW testing a recent development (i.e. 9.0-devel) version of FreeBSD
still failed to properly support pselect().
> Also, we have plenty of experience with substituting poll() for
> select(), so I'm not too worried about copy-and-pasting such code.
It's certainly a simpler change than the self-pipe trick vs. pselect(), yes.
I'm happy to go with the self-pipe trick. A quick micro-benchmark didn't
even show any significant difference compared to pselect(), so form that
perspective, it's not a big deal.
And we'd then have a major project using the self-pipe trick. (I would
still like to know what others exist).
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2010-09-09 08:34:42 | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-09-09 07:12:47 | Re: returning multiple result sets from a stored procedure |