Re: 300 seconds in less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

Started by Dave Pageover 21 years ago4 messagespatches

dpage@pgadmin.org

over 21 years ago

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-win32-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-win32-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf
Of Dave Page
Sent: 21 January 2005 13:20
To: Harald Massa; pgsql-hackers-win32@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] 300 seconds in less than 1
second with pg_autovacuum

-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-hackers-win32-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-win32-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf
Of Harald Massa
Sent: 21 January 2005 12:55
To: pgsql-hackers-win32@postgresql.org
Subject: [pgsql-hackers-win32] 300 seconds in less than 1
second with pg_autovacuum

What is going wrong? I did not fiddle with the
"Sleep-Period", just left it
on default.

Hmm:

Windows:

VOID Sleep(DWORD dwMilliseconds);

Unix:

unsigned int sleep(unsigned int seconds);

D'oh!

Patch coming up....

Patch attached... Harald, do you want another exe to try?

Regards, Dave

Andrew Dunstan

andrew@dunslane.net

over 21 years ago

In reply to: Dave Page (#1)

Re: [PATCHES] 300 seconds in less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

Dave Page said:

Hmm:

Windows:

VOID Sleep(DWORD dwMilliseconds);

Unix:

unsigned int sleep(unsigned int seconds);

D'oh!

Patch coming up....

We should not be using either of these, should we? pg_usleep() is platform
independent.

cheers

andrew

Dave Page

dpage@pgadmin.org

over 21 years ago

In reply to: Andrew Dunstan (#2)

Re: [PATCHES] 300 seconds in less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew@dunslane.net]
Sent: 21 January 2005 14:01
To: Dave Page
Cc: ghum@gmx.net; pgsql-hackers-win32@postgresql.org;
pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] 300 seconds in
less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

We should not be using either of these, should we?
pg_usleep() is platform
independent.

True. Attached.

Regards, Dave.

Import Notes

Resolved by subject fallback

Bruce Momjian

bruce@momjian.us

over 21 years ago

In reply to: Dave Page (#3)

Re: [PATCHES] 300 seconds in less than 1 second

[ Previous sleep() patch removed.]

Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:

http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches

It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Page wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:andrew@dunslane.net]
Sent: 21 January 2005 14:01
To: Dave Page
Cc: ghum@gmx.net; pgsql-hackers-win32@postgresql.org;
pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] 300 seconds in
less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

We should not be using either of these, should we?
pg_usleep() is platform
independent.

True. Attached.

Regards, Dave.

Content-Description: pg_autovacuum.c.diff

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)

-- 
  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

Re: 300 seconds in less than 1 second with pg_autovacuum

Attachments:

Attachments: