I don't know how is a sleep of 1 second going to be harmful here instead of keeping a busy wait.
Even if a=b is going to take 1 week as u say, isn't a sleep of 1 second, if nothing, would save some CPU resources instead of blindly looping for ever ? Aren't busy On 10/10/07, Richard Huxton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Jasbinder Singh Bali wrote: > > my loop is a busy wait and keeps iterating until a=b condition is met. > > However, it would lead to millions of instructions executing per second. > > > > So to save resources, I want to keep a sleep before re-iterating. Don't > > understand how is SLEEP disastrous here even if i don't know when is my > loop > > going to end > > What if it takes a week? > > That means you'll have a transaction open for a week blocking vacuum > from reclaiming space. > > -- > Richard Huxton > Archonet Ltd >
