From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 17 06:48:22 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99AA16A4CE; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 06:48:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (lexi.siliconlandmark.com [209.69.98.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D99543D45; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 06:48:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) j3H6mA7H041614; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:48:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from localhost (andy@localhost)j3H6m2vr041602; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:48:03 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) X-Authentication-Warning: lexi.siliconlandmark.com: andy owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:48:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Andre Guibert de Bruet To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <42617BA9.8070101@elischer.org> Message-ID: <20050417024042.L93987@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> References: <425CC7F8.3030803@samsco.org> <425CD009.6040208@freebsd.org> <20050413132603.GA39006@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <20050413141957.GA40546@orion.daedalusnetworks.priv> <20050415055604.N93987@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <425FA2AB.4070905@freebsd.org><425FFCF1.1080100@elischer.org> <4260D92C.1030703@freebsd.org> <42617BA9.8070101@elischer.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-SL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-SL-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.522, required 6, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.08, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-MailScanner-From: andy@siliconlandmark.com cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org cc: Giorgos Keramidas cc: David Xu cc: Jiawei Ye cc: Anthony Ginepro Subject: Re: How does one know how many thread a process owns? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 06:48:23 -0000 On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, Julian Elischer wrote: > David Xu wrote: >> Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: >>> On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Julian Elischer wrote: >>>> Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>>>> On 2005-04-15 19:16, David Xu wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I just checked what top does on SunOS, when a program has more than 999 >>>>> threads and it seems to clip the number of threads to 999, as if >>>>> something min(999, numthreads) is what is printed :-) >>>> >>>> you could proint " !!!" or "LOT" >>>> or do a roman numeral approx. >>>> e.g. MMC (2100).. what's roman for 10000? >>>> or 2E4 :-) >>> >>> I realize that top isn't an exact science, but I find that approximations >>> are generally a bad idea. I am in favor of axing the useless CPU column >>> and reclaiming some useful screen space for the others... :) >> >> CPU column is not very useful when displaying process and >> thread count, if it is only useful if it is displaying individual >> thread which is activated by 'H' key. > > CPU and thread count column could be shared > > [CPU] )[1] [2] [3] ...[99] could be CPUnum.. > that implies 1 thread > 2..9999 is a thread count > > when H mode is on, then we just show [CPUNUM] > wnen not we show [CPUNUM] or threadcount. I would like to make sure that we're all talking about the same CPU column here. I was referering to the one that is immediately to the left of the COMMAND field (To the right of WCPU) and not the "C" column which displays the proc on which the thread/process is running on. Andy | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ >