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 eryksun
Recipients Red Glyph, eryksun, paul.moore, steve.dower, tim.golden, zach.ware
Date 2019-08-14.21:45:26
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
> I suppose it may benefit from a more precise counter, but since in 
> Windows it also has a precise counter with time.perf_counter_ns(), 
> I was expecting to see that value change, but it was mainly a 
> confusion with the older time.clock().

Don't read too much into the clock info here:

    >>> time.get_clock_info('process_time').resolution

Process times [1] are stored as a 64-bit integer in units of 100 ns (1e-7). But the kernel schedules threads based on a timer that ticks every 15.625 ms by default. It can be lowered to about 0.5 ms, but this degrades battery life.

Date User Action Args
2019-08-14 21:45:26eryksunsetrecipients: + eryksun, paul.moore, tim.golden, zach.ware, steve.dower, Red Glyph
2019-08-14 21:45:26eryksunsetmessageid: <>
2019-08-14 21:45:26eryksunlinkissue37859 messages
2019-08-14 21:45:26eryksuncreate