Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 May 2001 01:29:09 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Cc:        dave <dleimbac@earthlink.net>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Gettimeofday Again...
Message-ID:  <3B023A55.D8E21C03@mindspring.com>
References:  <200105150337.UAA19677@gull.mail.pas.earthlink.net> <200105150346.f4F3kLE45720@earth.backplane.com> <3B00EF40.A1232B75@mindspring.com> <200105151737.f4FHbBL55271@earth.backplane.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Dillon wrote:
> :The gettimeofday() calls were _the_ major useless overhead,
> :until I eliminated them by creating a zero system call version
> 
>     Terry, to be blunt... if you need performance you don't go
>     making superfluous system calls for every transaction.  If
>     you want marketing eye candy, all you need to do is a
>     statistical measurement... do fine measurement of 10% of
>     the transactions rather then fine measurement of 100% of
>     the transaction, and you are done.
> 
>     Also, using gettimeofday() is a ridiculous way to measure
>     fine grained time billions of times in production code.  I
>     mean, sure, it works... but getitimer() is about 5 times
>     faster.

I didn't need it for elapsed time measurements, I needed
it for log timestamps, so getitimer() would be useless.

BTW... to be blunt, gettimeofday() wouldn't be _the_ major
useless overhead, if I were making superfluous system calls.

;^).

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B023A55.D8E21C03>