* Larry Rosenman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001116 12:09] wrote: > * Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001116 14:02]: > > > > This sounds like an interesting approach, yes. > > > Question: Is sleep(0) guaranteed to at least give up control? > > > > > > The way I read my UnixWare 7's man page, it might not, since alarm(0) > > > just cancels the alarm... > > > > Well, it certainly is a kernel call, and most OS's re-evaluate on kernel > > call return. > BUT, do we know for sure that sleep(0) is not optimized in the library > to just return? sleep(3) should conform to POSIX specification, if anyone has the reference they can check it to see what the effect of sleep(0) should be. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/t... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/acc... Vadim Mikheev
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/bac... Alfred Perlstein
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src... Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] pgs... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Don Baccus
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Larry Rosenman
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Larry Rosenman
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Alfred Perlstein
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Tom Samplonius
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Larry Rosenman
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] RE: [COMMITTERS] ... Larry Rosenman
- [HACKERS] WAL fsync scheduling Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL fsync schedul... Tom Lane
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL fsync schedul... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL fsync schedul... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [HACKERS] WAL fsync schedul... Larry Rosenman