Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After the first few sleeps should it add a random() element to the delay
> time?
Hmm, that's a thought --- but how big a random element?
Fooling with the original idea, I'm having trouble with getting both
plausible backoff and a reasonable number of attempts before failing.
I tried the sequence
10 msec, 20 msec, 40, 80, ..., 1280 (1.28 sec), repeat
but this only gives a couple of hundred tries before one minute has
elapsed, which seems uncomfortably low. Maybe there's no alternative,
though, if we want any good-sized delays in there.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
