On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:19:20AM +0000, Andrew Gabriel wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Rob Clark <rob1w...@aol.com> wrote: > > > > > >>> That comparison is wrong or misleading in a number of areas. For > >>> example: DTrace can instrument every instruction in user-land, whereas > >>> that page says SystemTap can instrument "zillions (statements, > >>> functions)" and DTrace only "millions (functions, markers)." > >>> ... > >>> > >> It's a Wiki, please fix it. > >> > > > > itg changed already but it is a protected page that cannot be edited. > > > > If you look at the history, one of the DTrace authors fixed it, but it > looks like someone at RedHat seems to have decided they know DTrace > better than one of the DTrace authors, and removed the DTrace correction.
Yes, there's quite a bit of history here. ;) Suffice it to say that SystemTap and DTrace differ at profound, architectural levels. And while it would be ungentlemanly to call them "clowns", it's a struggle to come up with a similarly apt label that is as succinct. And lest our sentiment be written off as partisanship, note that we aren't the only ones who believe that SystemTap is a fiasco; see Ted Tso's recent reproach of the project on the SystemTap mailing list: http://sourceware.org/ml/systemtap/2009-q1/msg00083.html Those seeking details on the two technologies should consult Stephen O'Grady's two blog entries (and accompanying comments) on the topic: http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2006/04/07/linux-responds-to-dtrace-systemtap-on-tap/ http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2008/07/01/dtrace-vs-systemtap-redux/ Always a gentleman, Bryan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bryan Cantrill, Sun Microsystems Fishworks. http://blogs.sun.com/bmc _______________________________________________ dtrace-discuss mailing list dtrace-discuss@opensolaris.org
