Re: [HACKERS] EXPLAIN ANALYZE on 8.2

From: Ron <rjpeace(at)earthlink(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] EXPLAIN ANALYZE on 8.2
Date: 2006-12-15 16:55:52
Message-ID: E1GvGLm-0000St-8t@elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

At 10:45 AM 12/15/2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > There are various attempts at providing better timing infrastructure at low
> > overhead but I'm not sure what's out there currently. I expect to
> do this what
> > we'll have to do is invent a pg_* abstraction that has various
> implementations
> > on different architectures.
>
>You've got to be kidding. Surely it's glibc's responsibility, not ours,
>to implement gettimeofday correctly for the hardware.
>
> regards, tom lane

I agree with Tom on this. Perhaps the best compromise is for the pg
community to make thoughtful suggestions to the glibc community?

Ron Peacetree

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-12-15 17:01:23 Re: Security leak with trigger functions?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-12-15 16:54:56 pgsql: Put JST back into the default set of timezone abbreviations; was

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-12-15 17:09:46 Re: Insertion to temp table deteriorating over time
Previous Message Ron 2006-12-15 16:53:28 Re: New to PostgreSQL, performance considerations