> On 2 Jul 2024, at 22:20, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> It sure looks like this is exact-to-the-nanosecond results,
> since the modal values match the overall per-loop timing,
> and there are no zero measurements.
That’s a very interesting result, from the UUID POV!
If time is almost always advancing, using time readings instead of a counter is very reasonable: we have interprocess
monotonicityalmost for free.
Though time is advancing in a very small steps… RFC assumes that we use microseconds, I’m not sure it’s ok to use 10
morebits for nanoseconds…
Thanks!
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
