Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От John A Meinel
Тема Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with
Дата
Msg-id 422CDA2A.1000105@arbash-meinel.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally)  ("Dave Held" <dave.held@arrayservicesgrp.com>)
Ответы Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-performance
Dave Held wrote:

>There is always clock().  It's mandated by ANSI C, but my docs say
>that POSIX requires CLOCKS_PER_SEC == 1000000 regardless of actual
>timer resolution, which seems a little brain-dead to me.
>
>__
>David B. Held
>
>

My experience with clock() on win32 is that CLOCKS_PER_SEC was 1000, and
it had a resolution of 55clocks / s. When I just did this:

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
    int start = clock();
    int now = start;
    cout << "Clock: " << CLOCKS_PER_SEC << endl;
    for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
        while(now == clock()) {
            // Do nothing
        }
        now = clock();
        cout << now-start << "\t" << (now - start) / (double)
CLOCKS_PER_SEC << endl;
    }
}

I got:
Clock: 1000
16      0.016
31      0.031
47      0.047
62      0.062
78      0.078
93      0.093
109     0.109
125     0.125
141     0.141
156     0.156

Which is about 1/0.016 = 62.5 clocks per second.
I'm pretty sure this is slightly worse than what we want. :)
It might be better on other platforms, but on win32 clock() is most
definitely *not* what you want.
John
=:->


Вложения

В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Dave Held"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with explain analyze finally)
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Help with tuning this query (with