On 01/29/2014 08:04 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > I am looking on this patch
Thank you for looking at it. > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/525fe206.6000...@dalibo.com > > a) pg_sleep_for - no objection - it is simple and secure Okay. > b) pg_sleep_until > > I am not sure - maybe this implementation is too simply. I see two > possible risk where it should not work as users can expect > > a) what will be expected behave whem time is changed - CET/CEST ? There is no risk there, the wake up time is specified with time zone. > b) what will be expected behave when board clock is not accurate and > it is periodically fixed (by NTP) - isn't better to sleep only few > seconds and recalculate sleeping interval? We could do that, but it seems like overkill. It would mean writing a new C function whereas this is just a simple helper for the existing pg_sleep() function. So my vote is to keep the patch as-is. -- Vik -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
