<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>FrostDB on Mi&amp;Bee Blog</title><link>https://blog.mickeyzzc.tech/en/tags/frostdb/</link><description>Recent content in FrostDB on Mi&amp;Bee Blog</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><managingEditor>蓝宝石的傻话</managingEditor><lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://blog.mickeyzzc.tech/en/tags/frostdb/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Continuous Profiling Storage: From pprof to Pyroscope V2 and Parca</title><link>https://blog.mickeyzzc.tech/en/posts/telemetry/obs-tech-06-profiling-storage/</link><pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://blog.mickeyzzc.tech/en/posts/telemetry/obs-tech-06-profiling-storage/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Continuous Profiling is a vital pillar of observability. Unlike traditional sampling profilers, continuous profiling captures application and kernel stack traces at a fixed frequency around the clock, generating flame graphs that help teams identify performance bottlenecks, memory leaks, and resource hotspots. This article focuses on the storage architecture of profiling data: starting from the Google pprof data model and flame graph construction algorithm, we analyze Pyroscope&amp;rsquo;s architectural evolution from V1 (TSDB+Parquet) to V2 (Metastore+Segments), Parca and FrostDB&amp;rsquo;s columnar storage innovation, commercial solutions from Datadog and Splunk, and conclude with comparative tables that highlight the differentiating choices across solutions.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>