Re: Perf support in CPython

[Pablo Galindo Salgado <pablogsal@gmail.com>]

> Do you really want to use full Dwarf mode? You have to save the entire
> stack space on every sample for that to work, so it seems a bit slow.
> But maybe it's not an issue for lower sampling frequencies. If the
> application has a huge stack it's not really scalable.
> Is that just so you have a mode that works out of the box without any
> recompilation of Python? But not necessarily the best way to do it?

I do not *want* to do it as we already have a fully working version
when frame pointers are included
using the perf maps version. But the problem is that users cannot
generally leverage this as most
Python redistributors do not compile with frame pointers, and this
renders the integration useless
for most people.

So indeed, as you mention dwarf unwinding is a suboptimal way but it
will provide a way
for most users to get the integration working for them and people that
really care about the
most performant way can compile Python with frame pointers. The
problem is that most
Python users do not compile Python themselves and this is a huge
barrier for them.

That's why we want to *also* have DWARF unwinding working, even if it
is suboptimal.