| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
| 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: | 2010-09-06 21:03:38 |
| Message-ID: | 23285.1283807018@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> writes:
> AFAICT the custom select() implementation we are using for Windows could
> easily be changed to mimic pselect() instead. Thus most reasonably
> up-to-date Linux distributions plus Windows certainly provide a workable
> pselect() syscall. Would it be worth using pselect() for those (and
> maybe others that support pselect() appropriately)?
I don't entirely see the point of opening ourselves up to the risk of
using a pselect that's not safe under the hood. In any case, on most
modern platforms poll() is preferable to any variant of select().
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-09-06 21:16:57 | Re: Bug / shortcoming in has_*_privilege |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-09-06 21:02:13 | Re: Synchronization levels in SR |