From: | Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, 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: | 2024-11-03 22:15:33 |
Message-ID: | CAMT0RQRNwvaHdH0hW+68BkW-b16jDzQXqjn2VM_Xk96ULhhSSg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Tom,
Did I understand correctly that you would prefer the documentation part to
be much smaller than it is now and all current the discussion about things
that are not strictly about the pg_test_timing to be not in the docs for it
?
My current plan is to move the other discussions around timing from th
edocs to PostgreSQL Wiki.
Would this be good ?
---
Best Regards
Hannu
On Sat, Nov 2, 2024 at 3:27 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "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 | 2024-11-03 22:19:09 | Re: What is a typical precision of gettimeofday()? |
Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2024-11-03 21:03:38 | Re: pgsql: Implement pg_wal_replay_wait() stored procedure |