Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard
Date: 2008-02-29 14:10:48
Message-ID: 20080229141048.GD4673@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Robert Lor wrote:

> My concern is that when we start adding more probes (not just the
> backend), we will have to add the following 5 lines in .c files that use
> the Dtrace macros. This seems intrusive and messy to me instead of in a
> centralized place like c.h. What are the disadvantages for keeping the
> way it is now?
>
> #ifdef ENABLE_DTRACE
> #include "utils/probes.h"
> #else
> #include "utils/probes_null.h"
> #endif

Why can't this block be centralized in probes.h?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Lor 2008-02-29 14:17:00 Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard
Previous Message Robert Lor 2008-02-29 13:58:33 Re: DTrace probe patch for OS X Leopard