| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: Sampling profiler updated |
| Date: | 2009-07-21 15:17:29 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070907210817k622ad423g1b44ec8528bf5471@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
>> Well, the objection remains: We already have dtrace support, and dtrace or
>> dtrace-like systems are spreading to many operating systems, so one wonders
>> whether it is useful to clutter the code with another probing system instead
>> of putting some resources, say, into getting systemtap up to speed.
>
> For the record, I think this patch is a waste of manpower and we should
> rely on dtrace/systemtap. However, if we are going to make our own
> homegrown substitute for those facilities, a minimum requirement should
> be that it uses the dtrace macros already put into the sources, rather
> than expecting that it gets to clutter the code some more with its own
> set of tracing markers.
dtrace/systemtap doesn't work on every OS someone might care about,
but I definitely agree that we should try to reuse the same tracing
markers.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua Brindle | 2009-07-21 15:24:55 | Re: [PATCH] SE-PgSQL/tiny rev.2193 |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-07-21 15:13:59 | Re: [PATCH] SE-PgSQL/tiny rev.2193 |