From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] dtrace probes for memory manager |
Date: | 2009-11-13 21:09:06 |
Message-ID: | 1258146546.14849.359.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 16:06 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> > Attached patch contains new dtrace probes for memory management.
>
> This is a bad idea and I want to reject it outright. No ordinary user
> is really going to care about those details, and palloc is a
> sufficiently hot hot-spot that even the allegedly negligible overhead
> of an inactive dtrace probe is going to cost us.
No ordinary user is going to use dtrace at all.
>
> If this goes in, I will disable dtrace support in Red Hat's builds,
> and I rather imagine that other packagers will react similarly.
Is it possible to have a set of probes that would only be enabled with
say, --enable-debug compile time option? I could certainly see the
benefit to these probes for profiling but that is such as specific use
that it seems to need a specific flag anyway.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor
Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564
Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering
If the world pushes look it in the eye and GRR. Then push back harder. - Salamander
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-11-13 21:09:46 | Re: Experimental patch: generating BKI revisited |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-11-13 21:07:24 | Re: next CommitFest |