Re: Nearest Common Ancestor Report (XDb1's $1000 Challenge)

Hugo Kornelis <hugo_at_pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 May 2004 19:01:43 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>>Hugo Kornelis <hugo_at_pe_NO_rFact.in_SPAM_fo> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>The elapsed time reported by SET STATISTICS TIME is close to the elapsed
>>>time I calculated by comparing start and end time, but there should have
>>>been no difference at all (reported elapsed: 1106144 ms; my calculation
>>>says 18:47:413 or 1127413 ms - a 21 sec difference!). The cpu time
>>>reported by SET STATISTICS TIME is 939797 ms, so it looks as if there's
>>>little time lost while waiting.
>>
>> What about the possibility of round-off error?

>21 seconds is a BIG roundoff error!!

     Yes, but I did not say ONE round-off error. It could be an accumulation of errors. You have probably heard the old scan about currency exchange: truncate (instead of rounding) and deposit the fractions to an account. It adds up.

[snipped alternative explanation which is apparently it]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.