Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 18:38:54 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. Message-ID: <3463.1004114334@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:49:41 PDT." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110261046280.10928-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.BSF.4.21.0110261046280.10928-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>, Ju lian Elischer writes: >considering that we didn't have ANY sub-second resolution for a long time >I think that >looking for sub microsecond resolution on access times is pointless at >this time.. I am looking for it at this time, not _for_ this time, but _for_ the future. If state of the art equipment can break the make(1) assumption today, what do you think the life expectancy of the designed concept is ? Certainly not 10+ years. And have you considered that there may be other and stronger requirements than make(1) and that multi-cpu, multi-threaded systems may push the envelope ? Solving the problem means going for a timestamp which can resolve any conceiveable CPU frequencies for all relevant future. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3463.1004114334>