Message-ID: <7c5f2170-f99d-5cd2-cb80-375155107ca7@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 18:52:44 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc?
Content-Language: en-US
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>, Lukas Fittl <lukas@fittl.com>,
 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar.ahmad@gmail.com>,
 Maciek Sakrejda <m.sakrejda@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <cc72a411-aa07-834c-85c0-489a5924f8bc@gmail.com>
 <CALDaNm080KHmRHo8OPcAEj+vNzXejwHgmddji5hkAdCwNsuqKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <b201ac3c-1bff-2414-be8e-fc287f78be1a@gmail.com>
 <20230113195547.k4nlrmawpijqwlsa@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <CA+TgmoYOvh=k-H9m21Lh-SWbn7TNurm3JoOVxW+kOO=Gn1_8Xw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230117164758.gx4uuzhk5grw7zea@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <3044621.1673976417@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20230117185053.owqxw4ebp5ny6zhd@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <51876d9a-6812-24b6-57ab-a555e85afb6b@gmail.com>
 <20230121041613.xhjfzk7iobhpqm3u@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <20230121053157.hsdemsvq7oqydfl6@awork3.anarazel.de>
From: David Geier <geidav.pg@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230121053157.hsdemsvq7oqydfl6@awork3.anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/7c5f2170-f99d-5cd2-cb80-375155107ca7%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 1/21/23 06:31, Andres Freund wrote:
> I pushed the int64-ification commits.

Great. I started rebasing.

One thing I was wondering about: why did you chose to use a signed 
instead of an unsigned 64-bit integer for the ticks?
>> If you have time to look at the pg_test_timing part, it'd be
>> appreciated. That's a it larger, and nobody looked at it yet. So I'm a bit
>> hesitant to push it.
> I haven't yet pushed the pg_test_timing (nor it's small prerequisite)
> patch.
>
> I've attached those two patches. Feel free to include them in your series if
> you want, then the CF entry (and thus cfbot) makes sense again...
I'll include them in my new patch set and also have a careful look at them.

-- 
David Geier
(ServiceNow)