On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 18:19, Tom Lane wrote: > 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.
How about (round to nearest 10msec):
time = oldtime + oldtime / 2 + oldtime * rand()
while (time > 1 second)
time = time - 0.80sec
This would stagger the wakeup times, and ensure a larger number of
retries -- but the times should be large enough after the first few
tries (larger than 200msec) that further backoff won't be required.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
