Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> 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 pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
