Re: [BUGS] BUG #1588: pg_autovacuum sleep parameter overflow

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> However, I am now wondering if we should change pg_usleep() to take a
> double rather than long.  This would avoid such problems in the future
> in other places in our code.

I'd leave it alone; there aren't any other places that need long sleeps,
and I don't really expect them.  When and if we have a real need for it,
we can change it.

            regards, tom lane