| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: What is a typical precision of gettimeofday()? |
| Date: | 2024-11-02 14:27:05 |
| Message-ID: | 2069996.1730557625@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> writes:
> This thread has associated CF entry which is marked as RwF [0]. But the change proved to be useful [1] in understanding what we can expect from time source.
> It was requested many times before [2,3]. Reading through this thread it seems to me that my questions about application of the pg_test_timing somehow switched focus from this patch. However, I'd appreciate if it was applied. Nanoseconds seem important to me.
> Let me know if I can help in any way. Thanks!
Basically, I think the code is ready, but I was awaiting Hannu's
proposal on rewriting the documentation for pg_test_timing.
Do you want to have a go at that?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-11-02 17:09:29 | Re: Alias of VALUES RTE in explain plan |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2024-11-02 13:18:39 | Re: Doc: typo in config.sgml |