[erlang-questions] wildcarded resource counters in Gproc

[Garrett Smith]

This doesn't feel right to me - it strikes me as edge case support
that's impacting what's otherwise a very simple feature.

If this is generally useful, would it make sense to implement it as a
new function call, which made the additional update explicit?

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Ulf Wiger <ulf@REDACTED> wrote:
> There's a new PR on Gproc, adding support for limited wildcard matching in
> resource counters.
>
> https://github.com/uwiger/gproc/pull/128
>
> I don't know how many people use resource counters ('rc'), but thought I'd
> ask.
>
> The operation of registering (or unregistering) a resource now makes one
> extra update_counter() protected by a try ... catch. My assumption is that
> this extra overhead will be insignificant to just about all use cases, but
> ... does anyone out there want to disagree?
>
> Briefly, when registering a resource ('r') object, gproc would try to
> perform an update_counter on the corresponding 'rc' object - an operation
> that might fail if the 'rc' object doesn't exist. Now, if the name of the
> resource is a tuple, it also tries to update an 'rc' object with the last
> element of the name tuple replaced with '\\_'. This make it possible to
> count resources whose names differ in only the last tuple element. For
> non-tuple resource names, it works just like before.
>
> BR,
> Ulf W
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>