Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 14:22:56 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org> To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: Arthur Mesh <arthurmesh@gmail.com>, Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>, Mark Murray <markm@freebsd.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, freebsd-rc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r239598 - head/etc/rc.d Message-ID: <1346962976.59094.187.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> In-Reply-To: <20120906200325.GA17159@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <201208222337.q7MNbORo017642@svn.freebsd.org> <5043E449.8050005@FreeBSD.org> <20120904220126.GA85339@dragon.NUXI.org> <50468326.8070009@FreeBSD.org> <20120906164514.GA14757@dragon.NUXI.org> <867gs7qcsl.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20120906184400.GF13179@dragon.NUXI.org> <86lignot6a.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20120906200325.GA17159@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 13:03 -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > > Does 'ps' vary that much across the two invocations that we had in > 'initrandom'? Please post a diff to back up any "yes" answer. > > We already have an invocation of 'ps'. Please suggest a *different* > command invocation. When I was playing with this stuff to come up with those command sequences I suggested, one thing I noticed was that the ps (with those extra parms for sorting and detailed stats) did differ if used as the first and last commands in the overall sequence. Especially they differed by being sorted into a slightly different order in the second invocation. I eventually came to the conclusion that the first one was still superfluous, and the way I should leverage that difference was to put any commands that report on ever-changing kernel statistics nearer to the end of the list, so that the commands that run first get a chance to perturb those stats as much as possible. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1346962976.59094.187.camel>