top | item 6033879 (no title) ijl | 12 years ago In the article it's actually 9ms rather than 90ms--0.009 seconds. discuss order hn newest bhauer|12 years ago Oh! Thanks for pointing that out. That means the numbers are more in line with what I've seen elsewhere. Sorry for the tangent!
bhauer|12 years ago Oh! Thanks for pointing that out. That means the numbers are more in line with what I've seen elsewhere. Sorry for the tangent!
bhauer|12 years ago