From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 24 19:02:35 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335A2106564A
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:02:35 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from nec556@retena.com)
Received: from resmaa14.ono.com (smtp14.ono.com [62.42.230.176])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B40C18FC08
	for <freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:02:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from GogPortatil.retena.com (188.76.0.243) by resmaa14.ono.com
	(8.5.113) (authenticated as nec556@retena.com)
	id 4D7F86D50198D837 for freebsd-performance@freebsd.org;
	Sun, 24 Jul 2011 20:51:02 +0200
Message-ID: <4D7F86D50198D837@> (added by postmaster@resmaa14.ono.com)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 20:50:14 +0200
To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
From: Eduardo Morras <nec556@retena.com>
In-Reply-To: <5C3302CF-8EE7-489E-8D31-624DA1637B73@mac.com>
References: <4E1421D9.7080808@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<CALH631=F4bSgNDE4w0qcXGMgGxZRRwCP9n-H4M0c+1UEaqWr7Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E147F54.40908@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<20110706162811.GA68436@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<CACqU3MVLr5VXRovs1uV+zHazJi2rrjE9Sp3XzsCPJ0Un06pmDQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110706193636.GA69550@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<4E14CCE5.4050906@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<CAJ-VmomNcbGggbQePi2kBC7uRJm3BenMNKjsqkH5hFLqudsCvg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110707015151.GB71966@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<CAJ-VmongFDGi0amaqod5_NBQcH+guA5QMXtttCjTD=ccB==+UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110707031151.GA72452@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
	<4E155A84.1010100@FreeBSD.org>
	<4E163856.2050300@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
	<5C3302CF-8EE7-489E-8D31-624DA1637B73@mac.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 10.0.1390 [1518/3785]
Subject: Re: Heavy I/O blocks FreeBSD box for several seconds
X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Performance/tuning <freebsd-performance.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-performance>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-performance@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance>,
	<mailto:freebsd-performance-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:02:35 -0000

At 01:15 08/07/2011, you wrote:
>On Jul 7, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote:
> > This is quibbling. On heavy loads on networ, disk et cetera, 
> isn't there always and also a CPU bound load?
>
>No.  Properly written software blocks when waiting on network or 
>disk I/O, and doesn't sit there spinning in a busy-wait consuming 
>CPU until it actually gets more work to do.
>
>See select(2), kqueue(2), and friends.
>
>Regards,

Excuse me, but where (which maillist) and when did this mail thread 
started? I have searched this maillist archive and freebsd-hackers 
but no success.

TIA

>--
>-Chuck