Re: [Windows,PATCH] Use faster, higher precision timer API

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Fabris Giovanni Consulente <cons(dot)FabrisGiovanni(at)sia(dot)eu>
Subject: Re: [Windows,PATCH] Use faster, higher precision timer API
Date: 2014-09-17 17:33:48
Message-ID: 20140917173348.GF8343@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2014-09-17 09:38:59 -0700, Tom Lane wrote:
> On the Unix side, I know exactly what would happen to a
> patch proposing that we replace gettimeofday() with clock_gettime()
> with no thought for backwards compatibility.

Btw, do you plan to pursue clock_gettime()? It'd be really neat to have
it...

>
> Quite aside from XP ... AFAICS from the patch description, this patch
> in itself moves us to a place that's a net negative in terms of
> functionality. Maybe it's a stepping stone to something better, but I
> think we should just go directly to the something better. I don't
> care for committing regressions on the promise that they'll get fixed
> later.

I don't think there's any regressions in that patch? Rather the
contrary. I understand the comment about the timer tick to be just as
applicable to the current code as the new version. Just that the old
code can't possibly have a precision lower than 1ms, but the new one
can.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Szymon Guz 2014-09-17 17:55:01 Re: printing table in asciidoc with psql
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2014-09-17 17:30:49 Re: printing table in asciidoc with psql