| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | David Geier <geidav(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc? |
| Date: | 2023-01-13 20:25:16 |
| Message-ID: | 294643.1673641516@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:
> On 2023-01-04 13:02:05 +0100, David Geier wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Change instr_time to just store nanoseconds, that's
>> cheaper.
> Does anybody see a reason to not move forward with this aspect? We do a fair
> amount of INSTR_TIME_ACCUM_DIFF() etc, and that gets a good bit cheaper by
> just using nanoseconds.
Cheaper, and perhaps more accurate too? Don't recall if we have any code
paths where the input timestamps are likely to be better-than-microsecond,
but surely that's coming someday.
I'm unsure that we want to deal with rdtsc's vagaries in general, but
no objection to changing instr_time.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-01-13 20:33:34 | Re: allow granting CLUSTER, REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, and REINDEX |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2023-01-13 19:57:08 | Re: Rework of collation code, extensibility |