Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1998 01:47:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek <ac199@hwcn.org> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: ac199@hwcn.org, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>, joelh@gnu.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: proposal to not change time_t Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980820014520.392H-100000@localhost> In-Reply-To: <199808192213.WAA00579@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 19 Aug 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > > by at least one unit (255ths, 1024ths, whatever), and then only > > resort to using duplicate times when it is forced to by benchmark > > programs that touch 1024 files per second just for kicks? > > It could simply be defeated by finding another pathalogical example. > Higher time resolution is the only way to fix it correctly. Sufficiently pathalogical examples defeat static resolutions (ie. any resolution that doesn't become finer as necessary). -- This .sig is not innovative, witty, or profund. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980820014520.392H-100000>