Hi,
On 2023-03-13 18:23:02 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> One question is whether it'd be better to use nanoseconds instead,
> since the relevant high-resolution primitives use those under the
> covers (struct timespec). On the other hand, microseconds are a good
> match for our TimestampTz which
[PATCH 1/3] Support microsecond based timeouts in WaitEventSet API.
WaitLatch() can only wait for whole numbers of milliseconds, a
limitation inherited ultimately from poll() and similar interfaces. In
the past it didn't matter much as sleep times were very inaccurate in
practice on comm
