Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc?
От | David Geier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | d07fca50-d6bd-f60c-c440-a480f8156c92@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc? (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Reduce timing overhead of EXPLAIN ANALYZE using rdtsc?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 1/16/23 18:37, Andres Freund wrote: > Hi, > > On 2023-01-02 14:28:20 +0100, David Geier wrote: > > I'm doubtful this is worth the complexity it incurs. By the time we convert > out of the instr_time format, the times shouldn't be small enough that the > accuracy is affected much. I don't feel strong about it and you have a point that we most likely only convert ones we've accumulated a fair amount of cycles. > Looking around, most of the existing uses of INSTR_TIME_GET_MICROSEC() > actually accumulate themselves, and should instead keep things in the > instr_time format and convert later. We'd win more accuracy / speed that way. > > I don't think the introduction of pg_time_usec_t was a great idea, but oh > well. Fully agreed. Why not replacing pg_time_usec_t with instr_time in a separate patch? I haven't looked carefully enough if all occurrences could sanely replaced but at least the ones that accumulate time seem good starting points. >> Additionally, I initialized a few variables of type instr_time which >> otherwise resulted in warnings due to use of potentially uninitialized >> variables. > Unless we decide, as I suggested downthread, that we deprecate > INSTR_TIME_SET_ZERO(), that's unfortunately not the right fix. I've a similar > patch that adds all the necesarry INSTR_TIME_SET_ZERO() calls. I don't feel strong about it, but like Tom tend towards keeping the initialization macro. Thanks that you have improved on the first patch and fixed these issues in a better way. >> What about renaming INSTR_TIME_GET_DOUBLE() to INSTR_TIME_GET_SECS() so that >> it's consistent with the _MILLISEC() and _MICROSEC() variants? >> The INSTR_TIME_GET_MICROSEC() returns a uint64 while the other variants >> return double. This seems error prone. What about renaming the function or >> also have the function return a double and cast where necessary at the call >> site? > I think those should be a separate discussion / patch. OK. I'll propose follow-on patches ones we're done with the ones at hand. I'll then rebase the RDTSC patches on your patch set. -- David Geier (ServiceNow)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: