From: | Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Performance analysis of plpgsql code |
Date: | 2005-06-28 01:34:19 |
Message-ID: | 20050628013419.GA17407@winnie.fuhr.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches pgsql-performance |
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 01:54:08AM +0000, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> On 06/27/2005 06:33:03 PM, Michael Fuhr wrote:
>
> >See timeofday().
>
> That only gives you the time at the start of the transaction,
> so you get no indication of how long anything in the
> transaction takes.
Did you read the documentation or try it? Perhaps you're thinking
of now(), current_timestamp, and friends, which don't advance during
a transaction; but as the documentation states, "timeofday() returns
the wall-clock time and does advance during transactions."
I just ran tests on versions of PostgreSQL going back to 7.2.8 and
in all of them timeofday() advanced during a transaction. Does it
not work on your system? If not then something's broken -- what
OS and version of PostgreSQL are you using?
--
Michael Fuhr
http://www.fuhr.org/~mfuhr/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karl O. Pinc | 2005-06-28 01:54:08 | Re: Performance analysis of plpgsql code |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-28 01:29:40 | Re: [BUGS] BUG #1707: statistics collector starts with stats_start_collector |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Karl O. Pinc | 2005-06-28 01:54:08 | Re: Performance analysis of plpgsql code |
Previous Message | Leigh Dyer | 2005-06-28 01:24:48 | Faster drives for WAL than for data? |