Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Thread: pg_arch.c call to sleep()

pg_arch.c call to sleep()

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:
We have the following warning on Windows:

pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be 
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a 
call to pg_usleep().

I'm inclined to do the latter, on grounds of consistency, but want to be 
sure that it will get the signal handling right.

Unless I hear squawks of objection I will supply a patch for that soon.

cheers

andrew

Re: pg_arch.c call to sleep()

From
Tom Lane
Date:
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> We have the following warning on Windows:
> pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

> To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be 
> <stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a 
> call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
(and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).
        regards, tom lane

Re: pg_arch.c call to sleep()

From
Andrew Dunstan
Date:

Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
>  
>
>>We have the following warning on Windows:
>>pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be 
>><stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a 
>>call to pg_usleep().
>>    
>>
>
><stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.
>  
>

Now I look closer I see that it declares _sleep() rather than sleep().

>I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
>wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
>(and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).
>
>
>  
>

I thought we invented pg_usleep so we could remove the calls to 
select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,timeout) which don't work on Windows.

cheers

andrew

Re: pg_arch.c call to sleep()

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > We have the following warning on Windows:
> > pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'
> 
> > To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be 
> > <stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a 
> > call to pg_usleep().
> 
> <stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.
> 
> I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
> wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
> (and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).

I think usleep was so we could accept signals during the sleep.

--  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

Re: pg_arch.c call to sleep()

From
"Magnus Hagander"
Date:
> > We have the following warning on Windows:
> > pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'
>
> > To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
> > <stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace
> the call by
> > a call to pg_usleep().
>
> <stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely
> won't fix it.
>
> I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part
> because we wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend,
> but I don't recall why (and the reasoning might not apply to
> the archiver process, anyway).

win32 signal handling won't interrupt sleep(), just pg_usleep().

//Magnus