Re: Performance monitor

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance monitor
Date: 2001-03-13 15:19:20
Message-ID: 19312.984496760@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Denis Perchine <dyp(at)perchine(dot)com> writes:
>>> Small question... Will it work in console? Or it will be X only?
>>
>> It will be tck/tk, so I guess X only.

> That's bad.

tcl/tk is cross-platform; there's no reason that a tcl-coded
performance monitor client couldn't run on Windows or Mac.

The real problem with the ps-based implementation that Bruce is
proposing is that it cannot work remotely at all, because there's
no way to get the ps data from another machine (unless you're
oldfashioned/foolish enough to be running a finger server that
allows remote ps). This I think is the key reason why we'll
ultimately want to forget about ps and go to a shared-memory-based
arrangement for performance info. That could support a client/server
architecture where the server is a backend process (or perhaps a
not-quite-backend process, but anyway attached to shared memory)
and the client is communicating with it over TCP.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2001-03-13 15:31:02 Re: PostgreSQL on multi-CPU systems
Previous Message Denis Perchine 2001-03-13 15:15:17 Re: problem with fe/be protocol and large objects