You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Use case:
On a running program, I want to enable perfmark for a time, and write the trace data to a file.
Then later, I want to restart perfmark again and save a second set of trace data, not containing the trace data from the first time perfmark was activated.
To achieve this there should be some way to clear the Storage, but there is currently no way to this (as far as I could find).
The Storage.resetForTest() method does clear the storage but stops perfmark from properly tracing multiple treads afterwards.
Recording everything and splitting it up later is also not desirable, as this would cause perfmark to take up more and more memory with each use.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In my case there would be a button to enable/disable perfmark, where disabling also writes to a file and clears the storage.
In a case like this clearing is not used excessively, so I would think some cost is not likely to be an issue.
In https://github.com/perfmark/perfmark/releases/tag/v0.26.0 PerfMark now has better methods for clearing storage in memory. The methods there are designed to allow existing threads to keep recording, but avoids synchronizing from the clearingThread to the other threads.
Use case:
On a running program, I want to enable perfmark for a time, and write the trace data to a file.
Then later, I want to restart perfmark again and save a second set of trace data, not containing the trace data from the first time perfmark was activated.
To achieve this there should be some way to clear the Storage, but there is currently no way to this (as far as I could find).
The Storage.resetForTest() method does clear the storage but stops perfmark from properly tracing multiple treads afterwards.
Recording everything and splitting it up later is also not desirable, as this would cause perfmark to take up more and more memory with each use.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: