Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4BB2F4278 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 11:11:42 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SAMGG-0007UQ-7k for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 14:11:41 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q2LEBMo9029856; Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:11:23 -0400 (EDT) To: Rafael Martinez cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: Re: timing != log duration In-reply-to: <4F69BE88.30905@usit.uio.no> References: <4F69BE88.30905@usit.uio.no> Comments: In-reply-to Rafael Martinez message dated "Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:42:00 +0100" Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 10:11:22 -0400 Message-ID: <29855.1332339082@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201203/136 X-Sequence-Number: 46586 Rafael Martinez writes: > I am wondering why the time reported by \timing in psql is not the same > as the time reported by duration in the log file when log_duration or > log_min_duration_statement are on? Network transmission delays, perhaps? psql reports the elapsed time seen at the client, which is necessarily going to be somewhat more than the time taken by the server. regards, tom lane