| From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Denis A Ustimenko <denis(at)oldham(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: droped out precise time calculations in src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c |
| Date: | 2002-10-16 05:35:58 |
| Message-ID: | 3DACFABE.5060005@joeconway.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Yes, the new code has _three_ time() calls, rather than the old code
> that I think only had two. I was going to mention it but I figured
> time() was a pretty light system call, sort of like getpid().
>
> I needed the additional time() calls so the computation of remaining
> time was more accurate, i.e. we are not resetting the timer on a
> select() EINTR anymore.
>
> Should I try to rework it?
>
I tried two more runs of 10000, and the average is pretty steady at 0.0087.
However the total range is a fair bit wider than I originally reported.
I added a forth time() call to see what the effect would be. It increased the
average to 0.0089 (two runs of 10000 connects each), so I don't think the
time() call explains the entire difference.
Not sure this is worth worrying about or not. I'd guess anyone serious about
keeping connect time to a minimum uses some kind of connection pool or
persistent connection anyway.
Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-10-16 05:38:59 | Re: Postgresql and multithreading |
| Previous Message | Anuradha Ratnaweera | 2002-10-16 05:34:43 | Re: Postgresql and multithreading |