Prakash Itnal <prakash074@gmail.com> writes:
> Sorry for the late response. The current patch only fixes the scenario-1
> listed below. It will not address the scenario-2. Also we need a fix in
> unix_latch.c where the remaining sleep time is evaluated, if latch is woken
> by other events (or result=0). Here to it is possible the latch might go in
> long sleep if time shifts to past time.
Forcing WL_TIMEOUT if the clock goes backwards seems like quite a bad
idea to me. That seems like a great way to make a bad situation worse,
ie it induces failures where there were none before.
regards, tom lane