Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)sun(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard
Date: 2008-02-29 07:24:57
Message-ID: 200802290825.03207.peter_e@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Robert Lor wrote:
> Please find the patch attached per this thread
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-02/msg00912.php

Another thing that is concerning me about this new approach is the way the
probes are named. For example, we'd now have a call

POSTGRESQL_LWLOCK_ACQUIRE()

in the code. This does not say we are *tracing* lock aquisition, but it looks
like a macro that actually acquires a lock.

I understand that these probe names follow some global naming scheme. Is it
hard to change that? I'd feel more comfortable with, say,
(D)TRACE_POSTGRESQL_LWLOCK_ACQUIRE().

Comments?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Teodor Sigaev 2008-02-29 12:41:05 Re: Proposed patch to change TOAST compression strategy
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-02-29 06:32:40 Re: tuplestore_putvalues()