Message101773
| Author |
nirai |
| Recipients |
DazWorrall, aconrad, alex, brian.curtin, carljm, coderanger, dabeaz, djc, eric.smith, flox, jcea, jhylton, karld, kevinwatters, konryd, loewis, mahmoudimus, movement, nirai, pitrou, rcohen, rh0dium, salgado, tarek |
| Date |
2010年03月26日.20:25:05 |
| SpamBayes Score |
3.5201464e-07 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1269635106.78.0.264749903103.issue7946@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> But on a busy system, won't measuring wall clock time rather than CPU time give bogus results?
This was the motivation for using clock_gettime(). I tried the wall clock version under load (including on single core system) and it seems to behave. Now it remains to rationalize it :) |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2010年03月26日 20:25:06 | nirai | set | recipients:
+ nirai, loewis, jhylton, jcea, pitrou, movement, eric.smith, kevinwatters, tarek, djc, karld, carljm, coderanger, alex, konryd, brian.curtin, flox, DazWorrall, salgado, rh0dium, rcohen, dabeaz, mahmoudimus, aconrad |
| 2010年03月26日 20:25:06 | nirai | set | messageid: <1269635106.78.0.264749903103.issue7946@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2010年03月26日 20:25:05 | nirai | link | issue7946 messages |
| 2010年03月26日 20:25:05 | nirai | create |
|