Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Mark Kirkwood
Тема Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal
Дата
Msg-id 449735B7.5040504@paradise.net.nz
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal  ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>)
Ответы Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal
Список pgsql-hackers
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 05:20:31PM -0400, Theo Schlossnagle wrote:
>> Heh.  Syscall probes and FBT probes in Dtrace have zero overhead.   
>> User-space probes do have overhead, but it is only a few instructions  
>> (two I think).  Besically, the probe points are replaced by illegal  
>> instructions and the kernel infrastructure for Dtrace will fasttrap  
>> the ops and then act.  So, it is tiny tiny overhead.  Little enough  
>> that it isn't unreasonable to instrument things like s_lock which are  
>> tiny.
> 
> If someone wanted to, they should be able to do benchmarking with the
> DTrace patches on pgFoundry to see the overhead of just having the
> probes in, and then having the probes in and actually using them. If you
> *really* want to see the difference, add a probe in s_lock. :)

We will need to benchmark on FreeBSD to see if those comments about 
overhead stand up to scrutiny there too.

I would think that even if (for instance) we find that there is no 
overhead on Solaris, those of us on platforms where DTrace is less 
mature would want the option of building without any probes at all in 
the code - I guess a configure option "--without-dtrace" on by default 
on those platforms would do it.

regards

Mark



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Theo Schlossnagle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal
Следующее
От: Theo Schlossnagle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Generic Monitoring Framework Proposal