Re: Systemtap filghtrecorder over network

[Jelle Smet <systemtap at smetj dot net>]

Hi,

There's a performance gain when writing directly to a socket using 
proper buffering compared to redirecting stdout to another process in 
order to send stap output over network. This small poc is in Python but 
should be relevant nevertheless: https://gist.github.com/3935398
Besides that it's from an sysadmin point of view cleaner to have 
network functionality built in?  One less dependency, native support, no 
wrapper scripts required.
Writing output to a file could also be done by using a STDOUT redirect 
to a file, yet the functionality is built in, which is the cleanest 
approach.

The motivation for being able to transmit data over network using a 
simple network protocol is that it would make life easier to centralize
a large amount of metrics from a large amount of hosts.
It's also not required to foresee any local disk space nor memory to 
store data, which could be handy on VM environments with a higher guest 
density.
I would *personally* find UDP more than sufficient, it would also be 
less intrusive or blocking for stap when the remote destination isn't 
available.

I've submitted a feature request here 
http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14755 as you 
suggested.

Thanks,

Jelle


On 22.10.2012 20:42, fche@redhat.com wrote:

> Hi -
>
> > > stap FOO.stp | nc -u LOGHOST LOGPORT
>
> > stap -F -u LOGHOST -p LOGPORT FOO.stp
>
> To the extent the latter is syntactic sugar for the former, its 
> better
> place could be a shell script wrapper. I wonder if I'm missing some
> more convincing reason to include support right within stap. If you
> can think of some, please feel free to open an enhancement request in
> our bugzilla.
>
> - FChE

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.