Groups > comp.databases.ms-sqlserver > #1999

Re: Alternative to WAITFOR DELAY

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Erland Sommarskog <esquel@sommarskog.se>
Newsgroups	comp.databases.ms-sqlserver
Subject	Re: Alternative to WAITFOR DELAY
Date	Wed, 29 Nov 2017 22:49:29 +0100
Organization	Erland Sommarskog
Lines	11
Message-ID	<XnsA83CE82FF733BYazorman@127.0.0.1> (permalink)
References	<20171129233836.16edaac99510193c72857910@gmail.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Info	reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ecf768c381507a8eade389647344eebf"; logging-data="3835"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/lBI1jlxAkaeqvoAJoduuD"
User-Agent	Xnews/2006.08.24 Mime-proxy/2.1.c.0 (Win32)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:iJS7/cqdUQBoRvEr8h0odcCSzUo=
Xref	csiph.com comp.databases.ms-sqlserver:1999

Show key headers only | View raw

Anton Shepelev (anton.txt@gmail.com) writes:
> Is there a more granular way to ease a tight polling
> loop in T-SQL than WAITFOR DEALAY?  A delay of  3.33
> milliseconds being a tad too long for my purposes, I
> seek a way to implement delays of about half a  mil-
> lisecond or shorter.  I do not need the precision of
> real-time systems and will accept  any  solution  to
> prevent a fast WHILE 1=1 loop from hogging the CPU.
> 

I guess that you could write a CLR procedure for the task.

Back to comp.databases.ms-sqlserver | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Alternative to WAITFOR DELAY Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2017-11-29 23:38 +0300
  Re: Alternative to WAITFOR DELAY Erland Sommarskog <esquel@sommarskog.se> - 2017-11-29 22:49 +0100
    Re: Alternative to WAITFOR DELAY Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2017-11-30 13:58 +0300

csiph-web