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
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 |