Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 16:33:47 +0200 From: deeptech71@gmail.com To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 64bit timestamp Message-ID: <4607D9CB.9080406@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070326134452.L69197@tribble.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> References: <200703251900.l2PJ0Z8w058298@lurza.secnetix.de> <4606D88E.4080503@gmail.com> <20070326134452.L69197@tribble.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jan Grant wrote: > On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, deeptech71@gmail.com wrote: > >> Oliver Fromme wrote: >> >> Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>> On 2007-03-25 01:36, deeptech71@gmail.com wrote: >>>> Oliver Fromme wrote: >>>>> FreeBSD's UFS2 already uses 96bit timestamps, where 64 bits are used >>>>> for seconds and 32 bits are used for nanoseconds. Is that sufficient >>>>> for you? >>>> What the hell for? >>> ``Just because it can.'' >> Good. :] 2x64bit for x64? > > To measure what? Even at nanosecond resolution, the notion of > timestamping an event seems a little arbitrary. Much beyond it and it's > not clear exactly what you're "measuring" - or even if there is any > physical interpretation. > > Yeah exactly, something's just redunant.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4607D9CB.9080406>