<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com" target="_blank">mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail-"><span id="gmail-m_6817611716625125080zwchr">----- On Dec 7, 2016, at 9:27 AM, Anders Wallin <<a href="mailto:wallinux@gmail.com" target="_blank">wallinux@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></span></span><div><span class="gmail-"><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;padding-left:5px;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><div dir="ltr">Hi,<br><div>Taking a number of snapshots always showed the events in the buffer, before the</div><div>commit de3fb857f034c208c135a10a3cdec2<wbr>dfe43fbda6 </div><div><br><div><div> Fix: ust-consumer: flush empty packets on snapshot channel</div><div> Snapshot operation on a non-stopped stream should use a "final" flush to</div><div> ensure empty packets are flushed, so we gather timestamps at the moment</div><div> where the snapshot is taken. This is important for streams that have a</div><div> low amount of activity, which might be on an empty packet when the</div><div> snapshot is triggered.</div><br><div>After this the number of snapshots that can be taken and getting events is equal to number of sub-buffers!?</div><div>I think this i BUG!</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Hi,<br></div><div><br></div><div>This has been done on purpose. By moving one packet forward even if there is no data</div><div>in the current packet, we are able to save the end timestamp corresponding to the moment the</div><div>snapshot is taken, which gives us information about the proper time-range to consider for each<br></div><div>stream.<br></div><div><br></div><div>This is needed for the babeltrace stream intersection feature to work properly on<br></div><div>snapshots in cases where some streams have low even throughput.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Can you describe your use-cases that rely on the prior behavior ?<br></div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,<br></div><div><br></div><div>Mathieu</div><div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>The use-case is that we rely on that all events are still in the buffer. Taken the snapshot is done by different applications/people.</div><div class="gmail_extra">We know the the snapshots will be overwritten when the buffer is full. </div><div class="gmail_extra">This patch introduced a new behavior in a stable release serie which is strange. For me this would be something that could change if you make a new feature</div><div class="gmail_extra">release, even if it should break use and test cases when we moved to this version.</div><div class="gmail_extra">I understand that the patch fixes another issue, but is there any other way to solve this issue and keep the existing behavior?<br><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature">Anders Wallin</div></div>
</div></div>