| From: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Ken Egervari" <ken(at)upfactor(dot)com>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally) |
| Date: | 2005-03-07 14:36:42 |
| Message-ID: | 6BCB9D8A16AC4241919521715F4D8BCE476A60@algol.sollentuna.se |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-performance |
> > Do we need actual high precision time, or do we just need
> to be able
> > to get high precision differences? Getting the differences
> is fairly
> > easy, but if you need to "sync up" any drif then it becomes
> a bit more
> > difficult.
>
> You're right, we only care about differences not absolute
> time. If there's something like a microseconds-since-bootup
> counter, it would be fine.
There is. I beleive QueryPerformanceCounter has sub-mirosecond
resolution.
Can we just replace gettimeofday() with a version that's basically:
if (never_run_before)
GetSystemTime() and get current timer for baseline.
now = baseline + current timer - baseline timer;
return now;
Or do we need to make changes at the points where the function is
actually called?
//Magnus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-07 14:45:37 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-07 14:11:05 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-07 14:45:37 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-07 14:11:05 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally) |