Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Fri, 18 May 2001 23:03:47 +0400
From:	egor duda <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	The Bat! (v1.45) Personal
Reply-To:	egor duda <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Organization:	deo
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
Message-ID:	<145193024514.20010518230347@logos-m.ru>
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [CYGWIN] Re: SIGTERM does not stop backend postgres processes immediately
In-reply-To:	<20010518144119.A8011@redhat.com>
References:	<3AFF4B61 DOT 39A0B754 AT tpf DOT co DOT jp> <20010509094031 DOT A87424 AT enteract DOT com>
	<20010509142629 DOT J355 AT dothill DOT com> <20010509164926 DOT C3169 AT redhat DOT com>
	<3AFF4B61 DOT 39A0B754 AT tpf DOT co DOT jp> <20010513231432 DOT A5059 AT redhat DOT com>
	<5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20010518110716 DOT 01b581e8 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com>
	<20010518144119 DOT A8011 AT redhat DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0

Hi!

Friday, 18 May, 2001 Christopher Faylor cgf AT redhat DOT com wrote:

CF> On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 11:23:30AM -0700, Randall R Schulz wrote:
>>Here's a snippet from the Linux section 2 manual page:
>>
>>...
>>int  select(int  n,  fd_set  *readfds,  fd_set  *writefds, fd_set 
>>*exceptfds, struct timeval *timeout));
>>...
>>timeout  is  an  upper bound on the amount of time elapsed before select 
>>returns. It may be zero, causing  select  to return  immediately. 
>>If  timeout  is  NULL  (no timeout), select can block indefinitely.
>>...
>>
>>Does the indefinite-timeout variant of select exist and work under Cygwin 
>>(or Windows, as the case may be) compatibly with the Linux API spec?

CF> I was actually wrong about polling in the case of sockets.  You don't
CF> have to poll but, if you use the current method, you would have to
CF> create a separate thread.  That's pretty expensive, too.

i was thinking of making this socket-select thread persistent. is it
worth doing? this'll probably speed select() a bit.

Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet 2:5020/496.19

- Raw text -