| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | John A Meinel <john(at)arbash-meinel(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dave Held <dave(dot)held(at)arrayservicesgrp(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with |
| Date: | 2005-03-07 22:56:39 |
| Message-ID: | 15994.1110236199@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-performance |
John A Meinel <john(at)arbash-meinel(dot)com> writes:
> Dave Held wrote:
>> There is always clock().
> My experience with clock() on win32 is that CLOCKS_PER_SEC was 1000, and
> it had a resolution of 55clocks / s. When I just did this:
The other problem is it measures process CPU time, not elapsed time
which is probably more significant for our purposes.
Which brings up a question: just what does QueryPerformanceCounter
measure?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-03-07 23:08:57 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with |
| Previous Message | John A Meinel | 2005-03-07 22:48:10 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-03-07 23:08:57 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with |
| Previous Message | John A Meinel | 2005-03-07 22:48:10 | Re: [PERFORM] Help with tuning this query (with |