Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: explain analyze timings
- From: "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
- To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: explain analyze timings
- Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 14:42:24 +0100
- Message-id: <6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE6C70E5(at)algol(dot)sollentuna(dot)se>
>> There is. I beleive QueryPerformanceCounter has sub-mirosecond >> resolution. > >> Can we just replace gettimeofday() with a version that's basically: > >No, because it's also used for actual time-of-day calls. It'd be >necessary to hack executor/instrument.c in particular. Here's a patch that does just this. On my system, the counter resolution is 3192090000 ticks per second (Intel Xeon CPU). On a AMD Athlon XP system, it's 3579545 ticks per second (a lot less, but still way way way better than gettimeofday has on win32). I also hacked commands/explain.c to get the total runtime of the query correct. //Magnus
Attachment:
win32_instr.patch
Description: win32_instr.patch
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: explain analyze timings
- From: Tom Lane
- Re: explain analyze timings
- From: Simon Riggs
- Re: explain analyze timings
- Prev by Date: Re: [HACKERS] snprintf causes regression tests
- Next by Date: Re: explain analyze timings
- Previous by thread: Re: [HACKERS] Changing the default wal_sync_method to open_sync for
- Next by thread: Re: explain analyze timings
- Indexes: