Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal

From: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Theo Schlossnagle <jesus(at)omniti(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal
Date: 2006-06-20 17:27:56
Message-ID: 4498301C.3000707@sun.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:

>This needs to work on Linux and Windows, minimum, also.
>
>
The proposed solution will work on Linux & Windows if they similar
facility that the macros can map to. Otherwise, the macros stay as
no-ops and will not affect those platforms at all.

>It's obviously impossible to move a production system to a different OS
>just to use a cool tracing tool. So the architecture must intelligently
>handle the needs of multiple OS - even if the underlying facilities on
>them do not yet provide what we'd like. So I'm OK with Solaris being the
>best, just as long as its not the only one that benefits.
>
>
>
The way it's proposed now, any OS can use the same interfaces and map to
their underlying facilities. Does it look reasonable?

Regards,
Robert

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2006-06-20 17:35:50 Re: Slightly bogus regression test for contrib/dblink
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-06-20 17:23:44 Re: Slightly bogus regression test for contrib/dblink