On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 7:09 PM, <furu...@pm.nttdata.co.jp> wrote: >>> Thanks for the review! >>> >>> + if (secs <= 0) >>> + secs = 1; /* Always sleep at least 1 sec */ >>> + >>> + sleeptime = secs * 1000 + usecs / 1000; >>> >>> The above is the code which caused that problem. 'usecs' should have been >>> reset to zero when 'secs' are rounded up to 1 second. But not. Attached >>> is the updated version of the patch. >> Thank you for the refactoring v2 patch. >> I did a review of the patch. >> >> 1. applied cleanly and compilation was without warnings and errors >> 2. all regress tests was passed ok >> 3. sleeptime is ok when the --status-intarvall is set to 1 > > Thanks for reviewing the patch! > > I think that this refactoring patch is useful for improving source code > readability and making the future patches simpler, whether we adopt > your patch or not. So, barring any objections, I'm thinking to commit > this refactoring patch.
Committed! Regards, -- Fujii Masao -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers