On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:44:34PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 05:27:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Hmm, in that case the cost deserves some further investigation. Can we > >> find out just what that routine does and where it's being called from? > > > There's a call-graph feature with oprofile as of version 0.8 with > > the opstack tool, but I'm having a terrible time figuring out why the > > output isn't doing the graphing part. Otherwise, I'd have that > > available already... > > I was wondering if this might be associated with do_sigaction. > do_sigaction is only 0.23 percent of the runtime according to the > oprofile results: > http://khack.osdl.org/stp/298124/oprofile/DBT_2_Profile-all.oprofile.txt > but the profile results for the same run: > http://khack.osdl.org/stp/298124/profile/DBT_2_Profile-tick.sort > show do_sigaction very high and recalc_sigpending_tsk nowhere at all. > Something funny there. >
I have always attributed those kind of differences based on how readprofile and oprofile collect their data. Granted I don't exactly understand it. Anyone familiar with the two differences? Mark ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
