| To: | Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: pmlogger -u questions |
| From: | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 14 Apr 2014 19:18:20 -0400 |
| Cc: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <534C6531.6050502@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <01e901cf56df$4ce97de0$e6bc79a0$@internode.on.net> <1665962954.4723287.1397437104781.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <534B4330.1060008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <y0meh104nvl.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <534C4FF4.5000304@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140414212551.GK14108@xxxxxxxxxx> <534C6531.6050502@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.2.2i |
Hi - On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 08:46:09AM +1000, Ken McDonell wrote: > [...] > Having actually made the change now, I like this even more ... in the > simplest implementation it is a one line change in __pmLogNewFile() to add > setvbuf(f, NULL, _IONBF, 0); We should do a round of analysis (strace or stap or whatever) to see how the change would affect i/o syscall traffic, just to confirm that we write records in nice big chunks. (If not, another possibility would be to adjust the stdio buffering dynamically, based on the actual size of the logger data records.) - FChE |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [pcp] pmlogrewrite questions from the developer meeting, Ken McDonell |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [pcp] pmlogrewrite questions from the developer meeting, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: pmlogger -u questions, Ken McDonell |
| Next by Thread: | Re: pmlogger -u questions, Ken McDonell |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |