> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:08:00 -0800
> From: david(at)fetter(dot)org
> To: dean_rasheed(at)hotmail(dot)com
> CC: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Auto-explain patch
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:55:53PM +0000, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>>> Maybe I missed something obvious here, but how does this patch handle
>>> the situation where people have turned on INTEGER_DATETIMES?
>>> David Fetter http://fetter.org/
>>> Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
>>> Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
>>> Remember to vote!
>>> Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
>> Sorry, I don't understand. I am new to this code, but I can't see
>> how the INTEGER_DATETIMES flag will affect this code. I am using the
>> macros and functions from instrument.h and explain.c for timing,
>> which appear to use gettimeofday() or QueryPerformanceCounter(),
>> coverting the result to a double to report the total time spent
>> running the query.
> It's the double part I don't quite get. Shouldn't that be an int64 in
> the case of INTEGER_DATETIMES?
All the times are 64-bit integers (or at least structures with 2 32-bit integers in them) until the end, when the elapsed time is converted to a double so that the query runtime can be printed out in ms ("Query runtime: %.3f ms"). This is the same as EXPLAIN ANALYSE, except in that case it is the total runtime ("Total runtime: %.3f ms\n") that gets reported, including startup/shutdown trigger times.
Share what Santa brought you
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-01-28 20:56:21|
|Subject: Re: WIP: plpgsql source code obfuscation |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2008-01-28 20:40:20|
|Subject: Re: Friendly help for psql|