| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size |
| Date: | 2022-06-17 17:43:49 |
| Message-ID: | 1261896.1655487829@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> I should have been more precise - what I meant was a timeout.c API that allows
> the caller to pass in "now", which in this case we'd get from
> GetCurrentTransactionStopTimestamp(), which would avoid the additional
> timestamp computation.
I don't care for that one bit: it makes the accuracy of all timeouts
dependent on how careful that caller is to provide an up-to-date "now".
In the example at hand, there is WAY too much code between
SetCurrentTransactionStopTimestamp() and the timer arming to make me
think the results will be acceptable.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Soref | 2022-06-17 17:52:21 | Re: SGML doc file references |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-06-17 17:30:55 | Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size |