Kirill,
When analyzing performance, it is better to have more tools rather than fewer
The problem is that Tracing itself affects performance. As a result, in
its current state it is hardly a tool for answering "performance"
questions. I believe that Performance Statistics is a better fit here,
as it is less intrusive.
Where Tracing does shines - it is in visualizing distributed Ignite
processes in a user-friendly way and showing how the duration of
individual stages correlate.
However:
1. As I mentioned earlier, Ignite Tracing handles asynchronous
operations poorly, making the resulting traces difficult to interpret.
2. We are not aware of any examples of end users relying on this
mentioned visualization (see the related discussion on the user mailing
list).
How difficult is it to maintain?
The more important question is whether we want to maintain it at all. In
my opinion, the answer is no.
On 7/13/26 13:25, ткаленко кирилл wrote:
Hi Nikolai, I see what you mean.
I believe tracing is a pretty useful mechanism - provided it’s set up and used
correctly - and the alternatives that were proposed don't really cover the same
ground.
How difficult is it to maintain?
How much does it complicate development? I’d assume it shouldn't get in the way
too much.
