Re: AW: [HACKERS] Re: beta5 ...

2001-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So, what was the case against using yield (2) ? $ man 2 yield No entry for yield in section 2 of the manual. Lack of portability :-( regards, tom lane

AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: beta5 ...

2001-02-19 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> > So, what was the case against using yield (2) ? > > $ man 2 yield > No entry for yield in section 2 of the manual. > > Lack of portability :-( I can't beleive that AIX finally has a convenience function that is missing in mainstream unix :-) $man 2 yield Purpose Yields the proces

Re: AW: [HACKERS] Re: beta5 ...

2001-02-19 Thread Bruce Momjian
> At least on AIX it looks like the select with 0 timeout is a noop, and does not > yield the processor. There was discussion, that other OS's (BSD) also does an > immediate return in case of 0 timeout. > > Minimum select(2) delay is 1 msec on AIX (tested with Tom's test.c). > > So, what was th

AW: [HACKERS] Re: beta5 ...

2001-02-19 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> > The easy fix is to just set the delay to zero. Looks like that will fix > > most of the problem. > > Except that Vadim had a reason for setting it to 5, and I'm loath to see > that changed unless someone actaully understands the ramifications other > then increasing performance ... Vadim o