Eryk Sun <eryk...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> I suppose it may benefit from a more precise counter, but since in
> Windows it also has a precise counter with time.perf_counter_ns(),
> I was expecting to see that value change, but it was mainly a
> confusion with the older time.clock().
Don't read too much into the clock info here:
>>> time.get_clock_info('process_time').resolution
1e-07
Process times [1] are stored as a 64-bit integer in units of 100 ns (1e-7). But
the kernel schedules threads based on a timer that ticks every 15.625 ms by
default. It can be lowered to about 0.5 ms, but this degrades battery life.
[1]
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/processthreadsapi/nf-processthreadsapi-getprocesstimes
----------
nosy: +eryksun
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37859>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
