Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 12:47:05 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> Subject: Re: Propose for Several Dump types Message-ID: <20041215184705.GA23842@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0412151120120.14979-100000@pancho> References: <41C04029.7010909@gamersimpact.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0412151120120.14979-100000@pancho>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Dec 15), Mark Linimon said: > On Wed, 15 Dec 2004, Ryan Sommers wrote: > > I like the idea of automated send capabilities. However, what is > > this going to mean for the already cluttered GNATS database? > > I believe the word we are looking for is "catastrophic." > > We should think long and hard before automating the sending of what > might be very large files into GNATS. GNATS is a flat-text=file > datatbase with a fragile format and primitive search capabilities > (kind of goes with that territory). I don't even want to think about > what this would do to its performance (remember that several people > mirror it via cvsup.) > > Having some kind of ability to save off the info is no doubt a good > idea, but auto-submitting it isn't. (Imagine for a moment the number > of downrev versions of FreeBSD that are still installed ...) An ideal would be something like Mozilla's talkback, where something aggregates the submitted stack traces and gives you a summary. Even sending the traces to a mailinglist with a searchable archive would be useful, though. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041215184705.GA23842>