On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 2:56 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 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. We'd also save memory in BufferUsage (144-122 bytes),
> Instrumentation (16 bytes saved in Instrumentation itself, 32 via
> BufferUsage).
I read through 0001 and it seems basically fine to me. Comments:
1. pg_clock_gettime_ns() doesn't follow pgindent conventions.
2. I'm not entirely sure that the new .?S_PER_.?S macros are
worthwhile but maybe they are, and in any case I don't care very much.
3. I've always found 'struct timespec' to be pretty annoying
notationally, so I like the fact that this patch would reduce use of
it.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com