From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org, "PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: explain analyze timings |
Date: | 2005-03-20 22:30:20 |
Message-ID: | 13968.1111357820@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-patches |
"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> Here is a second attempt, hope it's closer to what you expected.
Better --- patch applied with some minor editorialization.
> I still left two #ifdefs in there, for the addition and subtraction of
> timeval:s specifically. They could be made functions/macros too, just
> not sure if it's worth it.
Probably not. What bothers me more is the unconditional use of a
static inline function; but IIRC we are only supporting gcc-based builds
on Windows, so that probably isn't worth fixing either.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-03-20 23:09:03 | Re: Half filled xlogs |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-03-20 18:37:13 | Re: explain analyze timings |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2005-03-20 23:08:59 | Re: [patch 0/6] pgcrypto update |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-03-20 18:37:13 | Re: explain analyze timings |