how common is it for go devs to experience leaking goroutines ? id like to think go is a lot less shoot yourself in the foot here since they provide a framework for concurrency/parallelism rather than you working with the tiny pieces of it and building out the architecture yourself, but ive only needed to use goroutines once and it was a pretty problem-free experience.
I'm not aware of eBPF-based dynamic instrumentation for either tokio or other async runtimes, but I'm also not (in need to be) debugging this on a daily basis.
6 comments:
Interesting to see an ebpf approach to this idea, some time ago I did the same with Dtrace: https://gaultier.github.io/blog/detecting_goroutine_leaks_wi...
However I did not think of observing the ‘castgstatus’ runtime function.
Always nice to be able to compare the DTrace and Ebpf approaches, they both have different strong points.
that is actually sick.
how common is it for go devs to experience leaking goroutines ? id like to think go is a lot less shoot yourself in the foot here since they provide a framework for concurrency/parallelism rather than you working with the tiny pieces of it and building out the architecture yourself, but ive only needed to use goroutines once and it was a pretty problem-free experience.
> how common is it for go devs to experience leaking goroutines
About as often as leaking memory in C++
Cool! is there something similar for async rust ?
https://docs.rs/tokio-console/latest/tokio_console/ comes to mind.
I'm not aware of eBPF-based dynamic instrumentation for either tokio or other async runtimes, but I'm also not (in need to be) debugging this on a daily basis.
So cool! Does it support multiple Go versions?