From: | Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch |
Date: | 2006-10-10 11:13:49 |
Message-ID: | 452B806D.2060901@sun.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>Robert Treat wrote:
>
>
>>Also should installation.sgml
>>mention the issueswith building 32 vs 64 bit binaries
>>
>>
>
>I'm not convinced there is an issue. dtrace will build the right
>binaries by default. If you're messing with mixed environments *and*
>delve into dtrace, you should probably be able to figure this out
>yourself.
>
>
None that I'm aware of.
>
>
>>and/or the issue with static functions?
>>
>>
>
>The issue with that is simply that there is no released operating system
>version for which the dtrace support works. I'm not sure what to do
>about that.
>
>
>
This is a very temporary issue, and it will just require PostgreSQL to
be built on the lastest version of Solaris (e.g Solaris Express), but
the binary can will run just fine on the FCS version (e.g. Solaris 10).
This will be clarified in the doc patch.
-Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Benny Amorsen | 2006-10-10 12:01:57 | Re: Upgrading a database dump/restore |
Previous Message | Robert Lor | 2006-10-10 11:07:37 | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-10-10 14:21:18 | Re: [HACKERS] test: please ignore |
Previous Message | Robert Lor | 2006-10-10 11:07:37 | Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch |