[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6275?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14076581#comment-14076581
]
Ramkumar Aiyengar commented on SOLR-6275:
-----------------------------------------
>From what I have seen from googling, yes, nanoTime is way slower (only on
>Windows, there are claims its actually faster on Linux -- not that I buy
>that), currentTimeMillis takes a few nanoseconds and nanoTime a microsecond or
>two. But with what we are dealing with, I doubt it matters, esp. once per
>request. I didn't se anything about concurrency though, you have a link?
Theoretically, we could add a flag to RTimer which falls back to
currentTimeMillis on windows alone (ugh), but I doubt the ugliness is warranted.
> Improve accuracy of QTime reporting
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-6275
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-6275
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: search
> Reporter: Ramkumar Aiyengar
> Priority: Minor
>
> Currently, {{QTime}} uses {{currentTimeMillis}} instead of {{nanoTime}} and
> hence is not suitable for time measurements. Further, it is really started
> after all the dispatch logic in {{SolrDispatchFilter}} (same with the top
> level timing reported by {{debug=timing}}) which may or may not be expensive,
> and hence may not fully represent the time taken by the search. This is to
> remedy both cases.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
