Re: New DTrace probes proposal

From: Robert Lor <Robert(dot)Lor(at)Sun(dot)COM>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New DTrace probes proposal
Date: 2008-06-06 21:58:51
Message-ID: 4849B31B.8070004@sun.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Treat wrote:
>
> While it would be nice to have a clean merge of the two, it's probably simple enough to just
> re-implement the differences into your patch (since yours already compiles on 8.4).
Should be straightforward ... I can do the merge.
> As far as naming scheme, I'm not particularly wedded to either... is
> there a dtrace naming convention that could be followed?
>
Yep, and the probes I submitted pretty much follow the suggested naming
convention.

-Robert

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Pflug 2008-06-06 23:30:47 Re: Overhauling GUCS
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2008-06-06 21:55:00 Re: log_filename()