Skip to content

Use time.perf_counter_ns() instead of time.time_ns() #4

@sueskind

Description

@sueskind

First, thank you for this great project!

However, I fear, that there is some issue with the time measurement. Using time.get_clock_info() we can get this information:

>>> time.get_clock_info("time")
namespace(implementation='clock_gettime(CLOCK_REALTIME)', monotonic=False, adjustable=True, resolution=1e-09)
>>> time.get_clock_info("perf_counter")
namespace(implementation='clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC)', monotonic=True, adjustable=False, resolution=1e-09)
  • time.time() and therefore time.time_ns() make no claim for being monotonic, meaning that it is possible that a later reading returns a lower number.
  • The resolution may vary, up to only being 16 milliseconds, as reported in this Stack Overflow post.

Note: This is platform dependent, in this case run in Python 3.11.5 on Linux 6.5.6-arch2-1.

I would suggest switching time.time_ns() with time.perf_counter_ns() as is usually done for reliable performance measurements.

There is a PR open fixing this at #5.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions