| From: | Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch |
| Date: | 2006-07-24 01:00:31 |
| Message-ID: | 44C41BAF.7010701@sun.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>As I understand this, the probe file is compiled into some sort of
>object file which is linked into the binary.
>
Correct.
>So if we ever have probes
>in other components, we'd probably want to have separate probe source
>and object files for them. That would seem better than one big probe
>file that is linked in everywhere.
>
>
>
We agreed that there would only be one provider called postgresql, and I
believe (need to double check) all the probes have to be defined in the
same provider in the same file. What you suggest sounds like a good way
to separate probes from different components.
Regards,
-Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2006-07-24 01:18:33 | Re: RESET CONNECTION? |
| Previous Message | Robert Lor | 2006-07-24 00:52:12 | Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joe Conway | 2006-07-24 03:57:14 | Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?) |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-07-23 19:50:39 | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch |