Re: Performance monitor - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Performance monitor
Date
Msg-id 19312.984496760@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Performance monitor  (Denis Perchine <dyp@perchine.com>)
Responses Re: Performance monitor  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Denis Perchine <dyp@perchine.com> writes:
>>> Small question... Will it work in console? Or it will be X only?
>> 
>> It will be tck/tk, so I guess X only.

> That's bad.

tcl/tk is cross-platform; there's no reason that a tcl-coded
performance monitor client couldn't run on Windows or Mac.

The real problem with the ps-based implementation that Bruce is
proposing is that it cannot work remotely at all, because there's
no way to get the ps data from another machine (unless you're
oldfashioned/foolish enough to be running a finger server that
allows remote ps).  This I think is the key reason why we'll
ultimately want to forget about ps and go to a shared-memory-based
arrangement for performance info.  That could support a client/server
architecture where the server is a backend process (or perhaps a
not-quite-backend process, but anyway attached to shared memory)
and the client is communicating with it over TCP.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance monitor
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance monitor