Thread: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Fujii Masao
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: > pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch silences the warning. Also I found one trivial problem in the doc of pg_test_timing. The patch fixes that. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: >> pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. > > When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch > silences the warning. Unfortunately, that *produces* a warning on my machine. Normally, I think we handle this using INT64_FORMAT, but the fact that it's %10ld here and not just %lld makes that awkward. I guess we maybe need to insert some kludgy workaround here - write it into a separate buffer, and then blank-pad it, or something like that. > Also I found one trivial problem in the doc of pg_test_timing. The > patch fixes that. Thanks, committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Marko Kreen
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:19:37AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: > >> pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. > > > > When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch > > silences the warning. > > Unfortunately, that *produces* a warning on my machine. Normally, I > think we handle this using INT64_FORMAT, but the fact that it's %10ld > here and not just %lld makes that awkward. I guess we maybe need to > insert some kludgy workaround here - write it into a separate buffer, > and then blank-pad it, or something like that. How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ? -- marko
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Marko Kreen
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 03:46:26PM +0300, Marko Kreen wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:19:37AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: > > >> pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. > > > > > > When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch > > > silences the warning. > > > > Unfortunately, that *produces* a warning on my machine. Normally, I > > think we handle this using INT64_FORMAT, but the fact that it's %10ld > > here and not just %lld makes that awkward. I guess we maybe need to > > insert some kludgy workaround here - write it into a separate buffer, > > and then blank-pad it, or something like that. > > How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ? Well, it won't work because unlike <inttypes.h>, Postgres *_FORMAT includes '%' in it. I guess that why <inttypes.h> does not do it... -- marko
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote: >> How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ? > > Well, it won't work because unlike <inttypes.h>, Postgres *_FORMAT > includes '%' in it. > > I guess that why <inttypes.h> does not do it... Hmm, I guess we could change that, but it would create a hazard for thirty-party code that wants to be cross-version, and for back-patching. We could work around that by doing something more complex, like creating additional symbols, but I'm thinking it ain't worth it just for this. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Marko Kreen
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 08:57:42AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote: > >> How about: ".. %10" INT64_FORMAT " .. " ? > > > > Well, it won't work because unlike <inttypes.h>, Postgres *_FORMAT > > includes '%' in it. > > > > I guess that why <inttypes.h> does not do it... > > Hmm, I guess we could change that, but it would create a hazard for > thirty-party code that wants to be cross-version, and for > back-patching. We could work around that by doing something more > complex, like creating additional symbols, but I'm thinking it ain't > worth it just for this. Changing existing definition is bad idea indeed. And long-term path should be to move to standard int types, so another custom definition seems counter-productive. (OTOH, the 2 int64 _FORMATs are the only formats we maintain.) In this case the simple approach would be to use 'long long': ".. %10lld ..", (long long)(..) At least ecpg code uses it freely, and nobody has complained, so I guess we don't have any platforms that do not have it. -- marko
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Fujii Masao
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. >> >> When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch >> silences the warning. > > Unfortunately, that *produces* a warning on my machine. Normally, I > think we handle this using INT64_FORMAT, but the fact that it's %10ld > here and not just %lld makes that awkward. I guess we maybe need to > insert some kludgy workaround here - write it into a separate buffer, > and then blank-pad it, or something like that. This seems a simplest workaround. How about attached patch? Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Tom Lane
Date:
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
> This seems a simplest workaround. How about attached patch?
I think you need to tweak that to get the number to be right-justified
not left-justified.
regards, tom lane
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Fujii Masao
Date:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes: >> This seems a simplest workaround. How about attached patch? > > I think you need to tweak that to get the number to be right-justified > not left-justified. Unless I'm missing something, I did that because the patch uses %10s not %-10s. No? Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Tom Lane
Date:
Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think you need to tweak that to get the number to be right-justified
>> not left-justified.
> Unless I'm missing something, I did that because the patch uses %10s
> not %-10s. No?
Oh, you're right, I was misremembering which direction that went.
Sorry for the noise.
regards, tom lane
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing
From
Robert Haas
Date:
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org> wrote: >>>> pg_test_timing utility, to measure clock monotonicity and timing cost. >>> >>> When I compiled this, I got a compiler warning. Attached patch >>> silences the warning. >> >> Unfortunately, that *produces* a warning on my machine. Normally, I >> think we handle this using INT64_FORMAT, but the fact that it's %10ld >> here and not just %lld makes that awkward. I guess we maybe need to >> insert some kludgy workaround here - write it into a separate buffer, >> and then blank-pad it, or something like that. > > This seems a simplest workaround. How about attached patch? Thanks, committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company