<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi all<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I’m integrating CTF support to a third party framework. To do so, I decided to go with the Babeltrace 2 API (I love the rewrite BTW). So basically I made my custom plug-in and the framework spawns the following processing graph:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><b class="">My Framework -> SOURCE.MYPLUGIN.MYCOMPONENT -> SINK.CTF.FS</b></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This effectively generates a valid set of CTF traces. However, when exploring the Babeltrace2 source I found the existence of a <b class="">bt_ctf_writer, </b>which seems like a convenience object to write CTF directly (without the need of the graph). This would’ve been a much simpler approach for my use case, so I’m evaluating to rewrite using bt_ctf_writer in favor of simplicity and maintainability. My questions are:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><ul class="MailOutline"><li class="">Should bt_ctf_writer be used? </li><li class="">bt_ctf_writer is not documented, is it because is being deprecated?</li><li class="">Seems like <b class="">sink.ctf.fs </b>performs the trace and metadata write back to disk when it receives the end message, whereas with bt_ctf_writer I can manually flush them (which is very convenient to me). Is there a way to achieve this using the graph?</li></ul><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks!</div></div><div class="">Michael</div><div class=""><a href="http://www.ridgerun.com" class="">www.ridgerun.com</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>