Mikhail, > The problem is that Tracing itself affects performance. It looks like a bug, but it's not inherent to the tracing system. How could tracing affect performance if it doesn't catch or intercept anything — for example, only 1 in 1000 operations?
On Tue, Jul 14, 2026, 10:35 AM Mikhail Petrov <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. > Vladislav Pyatkov
