On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:39 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > In [1] Dominique Devienne complained that PQsocketPoll would be > far more useful to him if it had better-than-one-second timeout > resolution. I initially pushed back on that on the grounds that > post-beta1 is a bit late to be redefining public APIs. Which it is, > but if we don't fix it now then we'll be stuck supporting that API > indefinitely. And it's not like one-second resolution is great > for our internal usage either --- for example, I see that psql > is now doing > > end_time = time(NULL) + 1; > rc = PQsocketPoll(sock, forRead, !forRead, end_time);
I agree this is not great. I guess I didn't think about it very hard because, after all, we were just exposing an API that we'd already been using internally. But I think it's reasonable to adjust the API to allow for better resolution, as you propose. A second is a very long amount of time, and it's entirely reasonable for someone to want better granularity. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
