No thoughts on this one?
Den 25 mar 2015 16:53 skrev Jesper Derehag <jdere...@hotmail.com>:
Hi,
We have run into an issue with unique per-session tracepaths.
In my particular setup I am using relayd to centralize alot of consumers (not really important to this discussion, but thought I'd mention it anyway).
So the problem is that I have very limited quota for %outputpath. So to manage the quota fairly between channels I am using --tracefile-size to limit the size of each channel and thus preventing them from starving eachother out.
BUT, say I would want to restart the session for some reason, in my case it might be that the card running a specific session reboots, and then relayd would get a new session & channel, and thus create a new folder for that data. But since the old data still remains, I would run into the quota limit..
Below is how the tracepaths are created in pseudo-code:
per-pid tracing:
tracepath = %outputpath/%pid/%session_name-%pid-%datetime
per-uid tracing:
tracepath = %outputpath/uid/%uid/%arch-bit
So just reading this little snippet I am guessing one could avoid this particular problem by doing per-uid tracing, but that seems like an unnecessary workaround for what would seem like a trivial problem?
Would it instead be feasable to have the channel->path_name configurable, so that you essentially could avoid the uniqueness of the path (pid & datetime)?
Or is that instead opening pandoras box w.r.t. to tracefile consistency and contention?
Regards,
Jesper
_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
_______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
