From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: explain analyze timings |
Date: | 2005-03-20 15:31:48 |
Message-ID: | 1111332708.11750.362.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-patches |
On Sun, 2005-03-20 at 14:42 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> There is. I beleive QueryPerformanceCounter has sub-mirosecond
> >> resolution.
> >
> >> Can we just replace gettimeofday() with a version that's basically:
> >
> >No, because it's also used for actual time-of-day calls. It'd be
> >necessary to hack executor/instrument.c in particular.
>
> Here's a patch that does just this.
>
> On my system, the counter resolution is 3192090000 ticks per second
> (Intel Xeon CPU). On a AMD Athlon XP system, it's 3579545 ticks per
> second (a lot less, but still way way way better than gettimeofday has
> on win32).
Is this just a Win32 hack?
I've been looking for a sub-millisecond counter on other OS for a while
now...anybody know of any port specific counters elsewhere?
Thanks,
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-03-20 15:37:28 | Half filled xlogs |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-03-20 13:42:24 | Re: explain analyze timings |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John A Meinel | 2005-03-20 16:01:39 | Re: explain analyze timings |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-03-20 13:42:24 | Re: explain analyze timings |