Hi,
Regarding ETW, I found this blog post interesting as they are pursuing very
similar goals wrt to convenience of trace analysis vs performance of tracing:
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vancem/2015/09/20/rich-payload-data-in-eventsource-v4-6/
It points to a slightly more detailed explanation
Hi Christian,
Thanks for the pointers regarding LTT and the underlying Common Trace Format,
that was very informative.
The fact that CTF supports variants and dynamically sized structures makes it a
possible output for modmedLog, as is IETF's Compressed Binary Object
Representation.
What is not
On 12 October 2017 at 10:10, Arnaud Clère
wrote:
> Regarding the ParTraP language, currently, you need to parse, transform and
> classify
> unstructured traces in a JSON form to be able to use it. JSON will remain the
> pivot format
> between trace stores and tools so, if ETW or whatever native
On 11 October 2017 at 21:20, Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> In the kernel mode case, you access the events from /proc, which is
> backed by a kernel RCU list/buffer, i don't know how they have
> implemented their userspace solution, but i'm expecting something
> "pretty well done".
Interesting, on
ginal Message-
From: Christian Gagneraud [mailto:chg...@gmail.com]
Sent: mercredi 11 octobre 2017 10:21
To: Thiago Macieira
Cc: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 logging/tracing session notes
Hi,
Going through the wiki, the pdf and the codereview again, i see 3 differ
Hi,
Going through the wiki, the pdf and the codereview again, i see 3
different things:
- Qt: Logging framework
- ModMed: real-time dissection of organised/structured logs
- Ltt/ETW: event tracing/profiling
Different needs, different means, different reasons and different goals.
I like all 3! ;)
On 11 October 2017 at 03:49, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 20:18:42 CEST Mat Sutcliffe wrote:
> > On 10 October 2017 at 15:28, Thiago Macieira
> >
> > wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 15:12:52 CEST Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> > > > (PS: I don't even know if qDebu
On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 20:18:42 CEST Mat Sutcliffe wrote:
> On 10 October 2017 at 15:28, Thiago Macieira
>
> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 15:12:52 CEST Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> > > (PS: I don't even know if qDebug streaming is lock-free and i'm
> > > interested to know the answ
On 10 October 2017 at 15:28, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 15:12:52 CEST Christian Gagneraud wrote:
>
> > (PS: I don't even know if qDebug streaming is lock-free and i'm
> > interested to know the answer:))
>
> It's not. There are mutexes inside.
>
The SO answer and its co
On Tuesday, 10 October 2017 15:12:52 CEST Christian Gagneraud wrote:
> On 10 October 2017 at 22:48, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> > do not change qdebug but provide structured tracing as a new facility
>
> Any chance this can be made lock-free from a caller point of view?
No, we cannot provide a loc
On 10 October 2017 at 22:48, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> do not change qdebug but provide structured tracing as a new facility
Any chance this can be made lock-free from a caller point of view?
(PS: I don't even know if qDebug streaming is lock-free and i'm
interested to know the answer:))
A lock-fr
== Discussion ==
* Structured logging:
** We want to extract information from logs and detect common messages. For
example:
{|
! From
! To
|-
|
Got message "Hello"
|
Got message "%s" Hello
|-
|
Got message "World"
|
Got message "%s" World
|}
** We want to al
12 matches
Mail list logo
