From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Khouzam Subject: Tmf Ctf Parser Scalability issues (3/3) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:44:51 -0500 Message-ID: <5294D003.5040104@ericsson.com> Reply-To: Linux Tools developer discussions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linuxtools-dev-bounces-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org Sender: linuxtools-dev-bounces-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org To: "lttng-dev-bnB2LGs2QVJ+nrgayQ7rhA@public.gmane.org" , Linux Tools developer discussions List-Id: lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org Hello all, I was looking at the CTF parser in the TMF project of Linux Tools. I have come up with three points where scalability will be an issue. I am sending 3 emails, each one describing one of the issues so we can aggregate them more cohesively. First a primer, CTF is a file format that has traces written in packets, the packets are parts of files in streams, the streams are files in a directory. Issue 3: Event size As hinted in the previous email, it can definitely be a possibility that traces can have events that are too large to fit into memory. These events could also make reading a packet difficult, since the packet could have a said event in the middle, and therefore, we could end up with a packet that cannot be read properly with the sliding window memory map, unless corrective actions are taken. Proposed solution: Would anyone do this? I see it as a longer term problem and as a known limitation, unless someone says "Hey, I want 8gb events!".