From da64db6d2bfa6add6c6ad65d51468dba440d03e3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: root <root>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:16:36 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] *** empty log message ***

---
 ev.pod | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/ev.pod b/ev.pod
index 26d837b..c5d2b5f 100644
--- a/ev.pod
+++ b/ev.pod
@@ -598,12 +598,14 @@ overhead for the actual polling but can deliver many events at once.
 By setting a higher I<io collect interval> you allow libev to spend more
 time collecting I/O events, so you can handle more events per iteration,
 at the cost of increasing latency. Timeouts (both C<ev_periodic> and
-C<ev_timer>) will be not affected.
+C<ev_timer>) will be not affected. Setting this to a non-null bvalue will
+introduce an additional C<ev_sleep ()> call into most loop iterations.
 
 Likewise, by setting a higher I<timeout collect interval> you allow libev
 to spend more time collecting timeouts, at the expense of increased
 latency (the watcher callback will be called later). C<ev_io> watchers
-will not be affected.
+will not be affected. Setting this to a non-null value will not introduce
+any overhead in libev.
 
 Many (busy) programs can usually benefit by setting the io collect
 interval to a value near C<0.1> or so, which is often enough for
-- 
2.43.0