On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 10:48 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 03:11:51PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> > FYI, I am planning to go ahead and package this tool in /contrib for PG >> > 9.3. >> >> Isn't this exactly what we already did, in 9.2, in the form of >> contrib/pg_test_timing? > > Sorry, not sure how I missed that commit. Anyway, I am attaching a > patch for 9.3 that I think improves the output of the tool, plus adds > some C comments. > > The new output has the lowest duration times first: > > Testing timing overhead for 3 seconds. > Per loop time including overhead: 41.31 nsec > Histogram of timing durations: > < usec % of total count > 1 95.87135 69627856 > 2 4.12759 2997719 > 4 0.00086 628 > 8 0.00018 133 > 16 0.00001 5 > 32 0.00000 1 > > This should make the output clearer to eyeball for problems --- a good > timing has a high percentage on the first line, rather than on the last > line.
I guess I'm not sure the output format is an improvement. I wouldn't care much one way or the other if we had made this change at the time in AS92, but I'm not sure it's really worth breaking compatibility for a format that may or may not be any better. The person who wrote the original code presumably preferred it way it already is. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
