| From: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] dtrace probes for memory manager |
| Date: | 2009-12-11 20:07:51 |
| Message-ID: | 1260562071.2642.68.camel@localhost |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane píše v pá 11. 12. 2009 v 14:38 -0500:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I thought we had an idea of using the AllocSet dispatch mechanism to
> > make this zero-overhead in the case where the probes are not enabled.
> > What happened to that notion?
>
> I must have missed that discussion, but +1 --- should be possible to get
> to zero-overhead-when-off that way. The trick is to figure out
> what/where enables the alternate implementation. The current design
> assumes that the callers of FooContextCreate choose the implementation,
> but we don't want that here.
I thought about it. I think we can use GUC variable (e.g. dtraced_alloc)
and hook switch pointers to dtraced AsetFunctions. The problem is how to
distribute to all backend.
Zdenek
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-12-11 20:09:01 | Re: Adding support for SE-Linux security |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-12-11 20:06:54 | Re: Adding support for SE-Linux security |