Re: Proposed changes to DTrace probe implementation

From: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposed changes to DTrace probe implementation
Date: 2008-02-26 18:44:16
Message-ID: 47C45E00.40404@sun.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm unconvinced that there will be any probes that are common to all
> databases. I'd skip this part...
>
>
Any reason why we can't consider probes like transaction-start,
transaction-commit, or transaction-abort as common probes that can also
be used in other (maybe no all) databases? We are only talking about
the probe definition here as shown below, not how they will be implemented.

probe transaction__start(int);
probe transaction__commit(int);
probe transaction__abort(int);

Regards,
-Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2008-02-26 18:44:44 Re: pg_dump additional options for performance
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2008-02-26 18:32:59 Re: pg_dump additional options for performance