Re: suppressing useless wakeups in logical/worker.c

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu)" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: suppressing useless wakeups in logical/worker.c
Date: 2023-01-26 20:04:30
Message-ID: 3165443.1674763470@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 01:54:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> - * Both inputs must be ordinary finite timestamps (in current usage,
>> - * they'll be results from GetCurrentTimestamp()).
>> + * At least one input must be an ordinary finite timestamp, else the "diff"
>> + * calculation might overflow. We do support stop_time == TIMESTAMP_INFINITY,
>> + * which will result in INT_MAX wait time.

> I wonder if we should explicitly reject negative timestamps to eliminate
> any chance of int64 overflow, too.

Hmm. I'm disinclined to add an assumption that the epoch is in the past,
but I take your point that the subtraction would overflow with
TIMESTAMP_INFINITY and a negative finite timestamp. Maybe we should
make use of pg_sub_s64_overflow()?

BTW, I just noticed that the adjacent function TimestampDifference
has a lot of callers that would be much happier using
TimestampDifferenceMilliseconds.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-01-26 20:07:43 Re: improving user.c error messages
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2023-01-26 19:59:29 Re: improving user.c error messages