pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 17:26:46 -0400
Message-ID: <804572.1749590806@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <68489e08.df0a0220.3c14af.fdc6@mx.google.com>
References: <3322724.1659586159@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKGJ5ej33AJL19sQph7Z8SFZ6+aUSKxFTS6pvk2Y8J9Tcwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<295419.1659918447@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKGK=N8W2uFPdJr07Rs4dgRtbzKaYvCaPQasX3S8=aTO5PQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<747620.1660002360@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+hUKG+L_3brvh=8e0BW_VfX9h7MtwgN=nFHP5o7X2oZucY9dg@mail.gmail.com>
	<6846e0c3.df0a0220.39ef9b.c60e@mx.google.com>
	<n5hjl2cvnfr3oitguk5qmyep3ffb6ii5pfzcyezg4mjfb3ocqp@lt7iej77xiqw>
	<CA+hUKG+tqFVY7Fi=WBvZ6-UsATjcPNBDtphDm7YLjevm2kxSvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<68481005.df0a0220.23c1b8.78ca@mx.google.com>
	<68489e08.df0a0220.3c14af.fdc6@mx.google.com>

Michael Banck <mbanck@gmx.net> writes:
> 2. The fact that nobody else complained about those new(er) timestamp-
> comparison additions appears to imply that there are no 100ms resolution
> machines we support anymore. So did we consider switching those
> pg_sleep(0.1) calls in stats.sql to pg_sleep(0.01) to save a bit of
> time?

Yeah, we realized last year that no supported platform has worse than
1usec gettimeofday resolution anymore [1].  So I think you're right
that we could shave some milliseconds off stats.sql, as well as some
other test scripts.  I doubt this'd make for a meaningful time
savings, but perhaps it's worth doing just for consistency: grepping
for pg_sleep in our tests, I see anywhere from 0.1 to 0.001 sec.

			regards, tom lane

[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/be0339cc-1ae1-4892-9445-8e6d8995a44d@eisentraut.org





view thread (108+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <804572.1749590806@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../804572.1749590806@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/804572.1749590806@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, mbanck@gmx.net, thomas.munro@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, andrew@dunslane.net, robertmhaas@gmail.com
  Subject: Re: Cleaning up historical portability baggage
  In-Reply-To: <804572.1749590806@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox