Re:More powerful Go execution traces
by felixge on Friday March 15, 2024 @02:31AM
(#39712610)
> but if it really is 1-2% that'd be totally worth it in many cases
As one of the people who worked on the optimizations mentioned in the article, I'm probably biased, but I think you can expect those claims to hold outside of artificially pathological workloads :).
We're using execution tracing in our very large fleet of Go services at Datadog, and so far I've not seen any of our real workloads exceed 1% overhead from execution tracing.
In fact, we're confident enough that we built our goroutine timeline feature on top of execution traces, and it's enabled for all of our profiling customers by default nowdays as well [1].
As one of the people who worked on the optimizations mentioned in the article, I'm probably biased, but I think you can expect those claims to hold outside of artificially pathological workloads :).
We're using execution tracing in our very large fleet of Go services at Datadog, and so far I've not seen any of our real workloads exceed 1% overhead from execution tracing.
In fact, we're confident enough that we built our goroutine timeline feature on top of execution traces, and it's enabled for all of our profiling customers by default nowdays as well [1].
[1] https://blog.felixge.de/debug-go-request-latency-with-datado...