I wrote:
> BTW, why is it that the --aggregate-interval option is unsupported on
> Windows? Is that an artifact of the same disease of assuming too much
> about how instr_time is represented? I don't see any very good reason
> for it other than the weird decision to store the result of
> INSTR_TIME_GET_DOUBLE in a "long", which seems rather broken in any case.
After looking closer, I see the real issue is that it prints the integer
part of INSTR_TIME_GET_DOUBLE and documents that as being a Unix
timestamp. So that's not going to do either. I solved it the same way
as in the other code path, ie just eat the cost of doing our own time
inquiry.
regards, tom lane