pg_arch.c call to sleep()

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

We have the following warning on Windows:
pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a
call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
(and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

We have the following warning on Windows:
pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a
call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.

Now I look closer I see that it declares _sleep() rather than sleep().

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
(and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).

I thought we invented pg_usleep so we could remove the calls to
select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,timeout) which don't work on Windows.

cheers

andrew

Tom Lane wrote:

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

We have the following warning on Windows:
pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace the call by a
call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely won't fix it.

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part because we
wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend, but I don't recall why
(and the reasoning might not apply to the archiver process, anyway).

I think usleep was so we could accept signals during the sleep.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

We have the following warning on Windows:
pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace

the call by

a call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely
won't fix it.

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part
because we wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend,
but I don't recall why (and the reasoning might not apply to
the archiver process, anyway).

win32 signal handling won't interrupt sleep(), just pg_usleep().

//Magnus

Magnus Hagander wrote:

We have the following warning on Windows:
pgarch.c:349: warning: implicit declaration of function `sleep'

To fix it we could include the right header (which appears to be
<stdlib.h> in the Windows/Mingw case), or we could replace

the call by

a call to pg_usleep().

<stdlib.h> is included automatically by c.h, so that surely
won't fix it.

I have some recollection that we invented pg_usleep in part
because we wanted to not use sleep() at all in the backend,
but I don't recall why (and the reasoning might not apply to
the archiver process, anyway).

win32 signal handling won't interrupt sleep(), just pg_usleep().

I take this as confirmation that calling pg_usleep is the Right Thing (tm).

Here's the patch.

cheers

andrew

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

I take this as confirmation that calling pg_usleep is the Right Thing (tm).
Here's the patch.

Applied.

regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

I take this as confirmation that calling pg_usleep is the Right Thing (tm).
Here's the patch.

Applied.

Darnit, I caught one and not the other. Here's a oneline fix.

cheers

andrew

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:

Darnit, I caught one and not the other. Here's a oneline fix.

Done.

regards, tom lane