Doug
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Well, the downside to doing that is that sleeping for 1 second really is an awfully (unacceptably?) long time.
Doug Cutting said:
Hani Suleiman wrote:
Still doesn't 'feel' right though.
I agree. It makes it no longer a date field, but a version field. Any application which uses the value as a date may fail.
I think a better approach might be to define a sleep constant with different values on different OSes. It could be 1ms by default, and 1000 on OSX. It would be better yet if the sleep time could be determined based on the filesystem, and only set to 1000 for indexes that reside on HFS systems, but that may or may not be easy.
Doug
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]