Re: AW: AW: Re[4]: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

2001-03-19 Thread Tom Lane
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> HPUX has usleep, but the man page says >> >> The usleep() function is included for its historical usage. The >> setitimer() function is preferred over this function. > I doubt that setitimer has microsecond precision on HPUX. Well, if you i

AW: AW: Re[4]: [HACKERS] Allowing WAL fsync to be done via O_SYNC

2001-03-19 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> >> It's great as long as you never block, but it sucks for making things > >> wait, because the wait interval will be some multiple of 10 msec rather > >> than just the time till the lock comes free. > > > On the AIX platform usleep (3) is able to really sleep microseconds without > > busying