Tom, excuse me, I forget to copy previous posting to [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Oct 14, 2002 at 09:53:27AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Denis A Ustimenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:59:40PM -0700, Joe Conway wrote: > >> Well, if we were specifying the timeout in microseconds instead of seconds, > >> it would make sense to have better resolution. But when you can only > >> specify the timeout in seconds, the internal time comparison doesn't need > >> to be any more accurate than seconds (IMHO anyway). > > > Actually we have the state machine in connectDBComplete() and the timeout is > > set for machine as the whole. Therefore if 1 second timeout is seted for the > > connectDBComplete() the timeout of particualr iteration of loop can be less > > then 1 second. > > However, the code's been restructured so that we don't need to keep > track of the exact time spent in any one iteration. The error is only > on the overall delay. I agree with Joe that it's not worth the effort > needed (in the Win32 case) to make the timeout accurate to < 1 sec. >
Beware of almost 1 second posiible error. For example: connect_timeout == 1, we start at 0.999999 then finish_time == 1. If CPU is quite busy we will do only one iteration. I don't know is it enough to make connection? True timeout in this case == 0.000001 -- Regards Denis ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
