This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: atomicity of formatted output?

From: Josh Stone <jistone at redhat dot com>
To: halcyonic at gmail dot com
Cc: systemtap at sourceware dot org
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2012 13:33:23 -0700
Subject: Re: atomicity of formatted output?
References: <2788A1A0-479D-4244-BD2F-EEDA0DC48C89@eecs.harvard.edu>

On 07/31/2012 10:10 PM, halcyonic@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry, couldn't find this anywhere obvious in the documentation: are
> there any atomicity guarantees (even "best effort" ones) regarding
> formatted output from inside probes?  It looks to me like output from
> different probes is being intermingled occasionally, even if every
> probe only uses a single printf()...would it help to remove newlines
> in the printf()?

IIRC, we do try to keep things line-buffered, at least if you are
outputting to a TTY.  Can you provide an example script & workload where
you see this intermingling?

Josh

Follow-Ups:
- Re: atomicity of formatted output?
  - From: halcyonic

References:
- atomicity of formatted output?
  - From: halcyonic

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]