lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [lttng-dev] [PATCH 09/11] sched: export task_prio to GPL modules

* Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@am.sony.com> wrote:

> On 12/20/11 03:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > (Cc:-ing Arnaldo on this as well.)
> >
> > * Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org> wrote:
> >
>
> < snip >
>
> > I think your concentration on ABIs is missing a very fundamental
> > property of instrumentation:
> >
> > the life-time and persistence of instrumentation data is
> > typically very short ('days' is already an exception - typical
> > is minutes, at most hours), and for that reason we havent been
> > getting much pressure from users to maintain a perf.data ABI -
> > but we are doing it nevertheless.
> >
> > Instrumentation is fundamentally about the 'here and now' and so
> > it fundamentally differs from things like backup formats and
> > database formats. An ABI does not hurt and we are maintaining
> > it, but you are overrating its importance significantly.
>
> Just to provide visibility to a different use case...
>
> The life time of my data is typically weeks, months, or years
> (though I am not likely to re-process year old raw data).

I'm not saying that it's absolutely never done: for example
monitoring/logging on a production box and evaluating events
only once per month would certainly qualify.

I just say that the overwhelming majority of usecases utilize
traces on a short time-span and that we must keep the common
usecase in mind when supporting not so common usecases.

It's the same deal as with -rt: compared to the 'normal' usage
of Linux -rt is somewhat of a special case - yet it's still
something very much worth doing, as long as the main usecase is
always kept in mind.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-23 11:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans