Sorry for typos. Early morning on small phone with no coffee and old person eyes. :)
> On Jan 31, 2022, at 7:13 AM, Robert Engels <reng...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > If you need a “guarantee” in these efforts it is much more complex. You must > likely need a real-time OS and interrupt driven code. A general purpose > language, os and hardware probably won’t cut it. > > This of it this way though, if you had 20 cpus to spread the work on, you > only need to interrupt every 10 ms - far more achievable. As long as the work > is independent. > >>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 11:10 PM, envee <neeraj.vaidy...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> Thanks Kurtis and Robert. >> >> My use-case is for a telecommunications application (HTTP/2 client, 5G >> client to be precise) which needs to send 5G (HTTP/2) requests to a server >> at a configurable rate (TPS). >> While the telecom industry very commonly use the word TPS (Transactions Per >> Second), I would like to control the rate within the second i.e. if the TPS >> is to be 2000, then I would like to spread these 2000 transactions (HTTP/2 >> requests) over 1 second uniformly i.e. 1 request every 500 mico-seconds >> which will then result in 2000 requests in that 1 second. >> I believed that by using a time.Ticker to fire every 500 micro-seconds, I >> would be able to achieve this outcome. >> >> Is there any other way you could suggest I do this using Go ? >> >>> On Monday, 31 January 2022 at 15:17:23 UTC+11 ren...@ix.netcom.com wrote: >>> Pretty much what Kurtis said. Low interval timers usually require >>> specialized constructs if not a real time OS to efficiently (or even at >>> all). >>> >>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 9:16 PM, envee <neeraj....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>> Thanks, but I am not sure how that reference solves the issue ? >>> >>>> Or are you suggesting that the only way is to use Cgo and invoke usleep to >>>> get very close to the Ticker duration specified ? >>>> >>>>> On Monday, 31 January 2022 at 11:25:58 UTC+11 ren...@ix.netcom.com wrote: >>>>> See https://github.com/golang/go/issues/27707 >>>>> >>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:50 PM, envee <neeraj....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>>> I understand this issue has been discussed in the past, and I have seen >>>>>> a few comments from Ian and Russ Cox about this topic, but I could not >>>>>> arrive at a conclusion about how I can make the time.Ticker send me >>>>>> ticks at atleast close to the Ticker duration I specify. At the moment, >>>>>> I am seeing ticks being sent at way over the specified duration >>>>>> especially when I have sub-millisecond durations. >>>>>> With 1ms duration, the ticker seems to be quite close to the duration >>>>>> (maybe within +/-5%). I would be happier if it were within 1%, but I can >>>>>> handle that. >>>>>> >>>>>> With 1 micro-second duration, the ticker sends ticks nearly 4 times >>>>>> slower than expected. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here is my sample code >>>>>> " >>>>>> ti := time.NewTicker(1 * time.Millisecond) >>>>>> start := time.Now() >>>>>> for i := 0; i < 1000; i++ { >>>>>> <-ti.C >>>>>> } >>>>>> fmt.Printf("elapsed time = %v\n", time.Since(start)) >>>>>> " >>>>>> >>>>>> The output is usually close to 1 second as expected (close to) when >>>>>> using 1ms duration. >>>>>> elapsed time = 1.000159338s >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> My code for the microsecond test is : >>>>>> " >>>>>> ti := time.NewTicker(1 * time.Microsecond) >>>>>> start := time.Now() >>>>>> for i := 0; i < 1000000; i++ { >>>>>> <-ti.C >>>>>> } >>>>>> fmt.Printf("elapsed time = %v\n", time.Since(start)) >>>>>> " >>>>>> >>>>>> With this, I get the following output which shows the elapsed time close >>>>>> to 4 seconds : >>>>>> elapsed time = 4.796662856s >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there anyway, I can ensure ticks are sent at approximately within 5% >>>>>> of my specified duration ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I understand from time.Ticker docs that ticks will be lost if the ticker >>>>>> handler cannot keep up with the ticker time. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the simple code above, I am literally doing very minimal work in each >>>>>> loop iteration and that is about checking the loop condition. >>>>>> So I am not sure why ticks are being lost ? >>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "golang-nuts" group. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>>> an email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/5f55ccf9-1478-4490-a8f4-a35a5764721dn%40googlegroups.com. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "golang-nuts" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to golang-nuts...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/efa204c2-092f-46e1-abe4-8aa5c502d986n%40googlegroups.com. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "golang-nuts" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/3f9d1c36-4820-4555-a5f3-9721e661530bn%40googlegroups.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/356472DE-237E-48FB-A7B3-16D959977DAF%40ix.netcom.com.
