On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:54 AM, ivan babrou <ibob...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 July 2013 19:17, Dmitriy Igrishin <dmit...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> 2013/7/9 Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 12:28 PM, ivan babrou <ibob...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Hi, guys! I made a quick patch to support floating number in >>> > connect_timeout param for libpq. This will treat floating number as >>> > seconds so this is backwards-compatible. I don't usually write in C, >>> > so there may be mistakes. Could you review it and give me some >>> > feedback? >>> >>> First thing that jumps into my head: why not use asynchronous >>> connection (PQconnectStart, etc) and code the timeout on top of that? >> >> +1. >>> >>> >>> merlin >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) >>> To make changes to your subscription: >>> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >> >> >> >> >> -- >> // Dmitriy. >> > > Doesn't look like straightforward solution for me. In my case existing > drivers will benefit from my patch, in async case they should be > rewritten. We don't use libpq directly, we use native pgsql module > from php. > > Even with that, kernel can wait for milliseconds — why should we limit > precision 1000x times and reinvent milliseconds again in userspace?
Fair point. Although I still agree with Tom in the sense that if I were in your shoes I would be reconsidering certain parts of the connection stack since you have such demanding requirements; even with this solved I think other issues are lurking right around the corner. That said, I did scan your patch briefly and noted it only changed internal API functions and seems pretty straightforward. I withdraw my objection. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
