From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 28 03:15:17 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org 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 C5FD616A420; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 03:15:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (lexi.siliconlandmark.com [209.69.98.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FDBF43D46; Sat, 28 Jan 2006 03:15:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from [10.7.6.254] ([63.76.235.163]) by lexi.siliconlandmark.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k0S3FDvf090203; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:15:13 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) In-Reply-To: <43D9DECF.2060101@rogers.com> References: <20060127045553.F36B34503E@ptavv.es.net> <43D9DECF.2060101@rogers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <9C3809F0-05C0-41A4-BD82-5CD8BA3B2A81@siliconlandmark.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Andre Guibert de Bruet Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:15:07 -0500 To: Mike Jakubik X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) X-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-SL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-SL-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.457, required 6, BAYES_00 -2.60, SPF_FAIL 1.14) X-MailScanner-From: andy@siliconlandmark.com Cc: arch@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 03:15:17 -0000 On Jan 27, 2006, at 3:50 AM, Mike Jakubik wrote: > Kevin Oberman wrote: >> Good accounting is very important to some, but the issue of >> dealing with reduced clock speed is almost certainly of no issue >> when it comes to charging for computer use. I can't imagine any >> reason someone would be paying for CPU time on a processor not >> running "full out". >> >> The only time that this might be an issue is when thermal >> management takes over. I'd hope that thermal management would >> never kick in on a commercial compute server, but, if it did, the >> customer should, at least, only pay for the number of seconds the >> job would have run had it been properly cooled. (Actually, he >> should probably pay less as his time is also being wasted.) > > As a user from the 2.x days, i would much rather have the great > increase of context switching performance than super accurate cpu > accounting that i will never use. FreeBSD needs to focus on > performance now. These are my exact thoughts on the matter! Andy /* Andre Guibert de Bruet * 6f43 6564 7020 656f 2e74 4220 7469 6a20 */ /* Code poet / Sysadmin * 636f 656b 2e79 5320 7379 6461 696d 2e6e */ /* GSM: +1 734 846 8758 * 5520 494e 2058 6c73 7565 6874 002e 0000 */ /* WWW: siliconlandmark.com * DP Xeon 3.0-1MB/12GB/570GB */