> Doesn't this remove the advantage of using apr_time_t's? The whole point > of that format was that we were using microseconds instead of seconds. If > that is our goal, then why don't we just change what an apr_time_t is? > apr_time_t should maintain 1 microsecond resolution (there are legit uses for it). Reducing resolutions should be a runtime or compile time option for folks who want speed at the expense of function. Bill
- SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Reduce time resolution to... Bill Stoddard
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Reduce time reso... Bill Stoddard
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Reduce time reso... rbb
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Reduce time ... Bill Stoddard
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Reduce t... Roy T. Fielding
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2: Redu... rbb
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a6-2:... Roy T. Fielding
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-2.0a... dean gaudet
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... Bill Stoddard
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... Jim Jagielski
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... Jim Jagielski
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... William A. Rowe, Jr.
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... Jim Jagielski
- Re: SGI Patch 10xpatch-... Roy T. Fielding
