Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Already done -- that's what Denis is unhappy about.
> 
> > OK, I see that, but now, we are stuffing everything into a timeval
> > struct.  Does that make sense?  Shouldn't we just use time_t?
> 
> Yeah, the code could be simplified now.  I'm also still not happy about
> the question of whether it's safe to assume tv_sec is signed.  I think
> the running state should be just finish_time, and then inside the
> loop when we are about to wait, we could do
> 
>       current_time = time(NULL);
>       if (current_time >= finish_time)
>       {
>               // failure exit
>       }
>       remains.tv_sec = finish_time - current_time;
>       remains.tv_usec = 0;
>       // pass &remains to select...

That whole remains structure should be a time_t variable, and then we
_know_ we can't assume it is signed.  The use of timeval should
happen only in pqWaitTimed because it has to use select().

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])

Reply via email to