Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch

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: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-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.  

>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.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tatsuo IshiiDate: 2006-07-24 01:18:33
Previous:From: Robert LorDate: 2006-07-24 00:52:12
Subject: Re: Sun Donated a Sun Fire T2000 to the PostgreSQL

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2006-07-24 03:57:14
Subject: Values list-of-targetlists patch for comments (was Re: [HACKERS] 8.2 features?)
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2006-07-23 19:50:39
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Generic Monitoring Framework with DTrace patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group