Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Possible explanation for Win32 stats regression

2006-07-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: heh. I was just doing it the way Tom suggested - see attached. With a little more trouble we could also keep track if the listened for events and sometimes save ourselves a second call to WSAEventSelect, but I'm not sure it's worth it. It all depends on the overh

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Possible explanation for Win32 stats

2006-07-29 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
heh. I was just doing it the way Tom suggested - see attached. With a little more trouble we could also keep track if the listened for events and sometimes save ourselves a second call to WSAEventSelect, but I'm not sure it's worth it. It all depends on the overhead of WSAEventSelect()

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Possible explanation for Win32 stats regression

2006-07-29 Thread Andrew Dunstan
heh. I was just doing it the way Tom suggested - see attached. With a little more trouble we could also keep track if the listened for events and sometimes save ourselves a second call to WSAEventSelect, but I'm not sure it's worth it. cheers andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is anyone wor

Re: [PATCHES] [HACKERS] Possible explanation for Win32 stats regression test

2006-07-29 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is anyone working on this? Tom Lane wrote: > korry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > The problem is that, each time you go through > > pgwin32_waitforsinglesocket(), you tie the *same* kernel object > > (waitevent is static) to each socket. > > > The fix is pretty simple - just call WSAEventS