Re: Use nanosleep(2) in pg_usleep, if available?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Use nanosleep(2) in pg_usleep, if available?
Date: 2019-03-12 17:17:19
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZQrn=9wpSa25zn3pXQ+GM+hUoQSf_2-dN8F3G+t5BCJA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 1:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> (I'm not sure what I think about which behavior is really more
> desirable. We can debate that if there's actually a plausible
> choice to be made, which seems to depend on Windows.)

Yeah, that's a fair question. My motivation for asking was that I
sometimes try to insert sleeps when debugging things, and they don't
actually sleep, because they get interrupted. That's not dispositive,
though.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2019-03-12 17:20:28 Re: Use nanosleep(2) in pg_usleep, if available?
Previous Message Robert Haas 2019-03-12 17:15:51 Re: Timeout parameters