RFR: 8204681: Option to include timestamp in hprof filename [v2]

[Thomas Stuefe]

On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 12:45:07 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> So should we have %t and %d ? Or adopt all the decorator options from unified logging? To me those seem extreme: if I just want output files to say when they were made, I don't really need options, or nanoseconds, and would be quite happy with the ostream.cpp style of "%t => YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM-SS".

A subset of the decorators of UL would make perfect sense, especially if we talk about a (possibly future) generic way to enrich file names:
- time (t),  utctime (UTC)  make obviously sense
- uptime (u), ... possibly (eg as a primitive way to avoid duplication for multiple dumped files in one run)
- hostname makes a lot of sense for distributed systems
- pid obvious
- tid possibly, if one has the need to dump per-thread files

I would argue for reusing these specifiers, and (either now or in the future) possibly also the code behind them, for decorating file names. Better than having to come up today with a %t, tomorrow someone maybe needs the hostname too, so %h? and so on.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20568#issuecomment-2449854403