Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 10:30:34 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@technokratis.com> Cc: "James E. Housley" <jeh@FreeBSD.ORG>, Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit counters again Message-ID: <3C4323CA.13461AA1@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.41.0201132057560.62182-100000@prg.traveller.cz> <3C41F3FD.4ECC8CD@mindspring.com> <20020113231459.GA30349@voi.aagh.net> <3C42390A.F9E9F533@mindspring.com> <3C42E899.CB21BD0A@FreeBSD.org> <20020114105859.A24635@technokratis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bosko Milekic wrote: > You know, if you have a counter overflowing in 60 to 120 seconds, > then perhaps what it's counting should not be counted to begin with. > > I stumbled upon several statistics issues while writing mb_alloc and > I tried to the best of my abilities to group the manipulation of the > counters under some common already existing lock. In some odd cases, > this was impossible. But I refused to introduce a bus-locked instruction > or, worse, a whole new lock just to deal with the statistics. It's > too much overhead for mere statistics and, in the latter case, it's > even very bug-prone. To be honest, after actually examining more > closely what the counters collected statistics on, I realized that they > were pretty much totally redundant and am considering removing those > few problematic ones some time in the future. Exactly. I realize that some people's revenue model's depend on this level of statistic keeping, but I have no problem making *only* them pay for that level of detail, instead of everyone. "B-1!" ... "Hey! You sank my business model!" -- Alfred Perlstein -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3C4323CA.13461AA1>