| 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: | 2024-07-03 08:03:16 |
| Message-ID: | 3207654.1719993796@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:
> That’s a very interesting result, from the UUID POV!
> If time is almost always advancing, using time readings instead of a counter is very reasonable: we have interprocess monotonicity almost for free.
> Though time is advancing in a very small steps… RFC assumes that we use microseconds, I’m not sure it’s ok to use 10 more bits for nanoseconds…
Keep in mind also that instr_time.h does not pretend to provide
real time --- the clock origin is arbitrary. But these results
do give me additional confidence that gettimeofday() should be
good to the microsecond on any remotely-modern platform.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-07-03 08:08:59 | Re: Remove last traces of HPPA support |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2024-07-03 07:37:32 | Additional minor pg_dump cleanups |