Message403631
➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | vstinner |
| Date | 2021-10-11.08:28:27 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1633940907.8.0.793399065339.issue45429@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
In bpo-21302, the Windows implementation of time.sleep() was modified to use a waitable timer: New changeset 58f8adfda3c2b42f654a55500e8e3a6433cb95f2 by Victor Stinner in branch 'main': bpo-21302: time.sleep() uses waitable timer on Windows (GH-28483) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/58f8adfda3c2b42f654a55500e8e3a6433cb95f2 It now calls the functions: * CreateWaitableTimerW() * SetWaitableTimer() * WaitForMultipleObjects() While SetWaitableTimer() has a resolution of 100 ns, the timer has a resolution of 15.6 ms in practice. We could use the undocumented CREATE_WAITABLE_TIMER_HIGH_RESOLUTION flag with CreateWaitableTimerEx(). See: https://bugs.python.org/issue21302#msg403550 See also: * https://randomascii.wordpress.com/2013/07/08/windows-timer-resolution-megawatts-wasted/ * https://vstinner.readthedocs.io/windows.html#time |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2021-10-11 08:28:27 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner |
| 2021-10-11 08:28:27 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1633940907.8.0.793399065339.issue45429@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2021-10-11 08:28:27 | vstinner | link | issue45429 messages |
| 2021-10-11 08:28:27 | vstinner | create | |