>>> Howard Chu <[email protected]> schrieb am 18.12.2018 um 09:55 in Nachricht <[email protected]>: > Ulrich Windl wrote: >>>>> "A. Schulze" <[email protected]> schrieb am 17.12.2018 um 22:19 in >> Nachricht <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> Am 16.12.18 um 23:32 schrieb Howard Chu: >>>>>>>>>> ./data/regressions/its8752/its8752 failed (exit 1) >>>> >>>> I believe this is simply due to too short a sleep between steps. It >>>> happens >>> quite >>>> often on slower machines. >>> >>> are there plans to to relax the timings or should I simple ignore that fail? >>> "it may happen that 'make its' pass on other computers" don't really >>> satisfy > >>> me :-) >> >> When waiting for an event (other than passing of time) sleep is always the > wrong solution > > False. > >> (iven if seemingly industry-standard work-around for all kinds of bugs): > It's either too long, wasting time, or too short, failing to fulfill ist > purpose. > > sleep is used because it is a low cost operation on the computer. Anything > more active than > that will use more system resources, which are obviously already scarce on a > slower system. > i.e., active polling on a slow machine will only make things slower.
I agree that busy waiting is worse than sleeping. > > -- > -- Howard Chu > CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com > Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/ > Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
