From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu May  1 13:53:22 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-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 776F837B401
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  1 May 2003 13:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBB443FA3
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Thu,  1 May 2003 13:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h41KrGLr003315;
	Thu, 1 May 2003 22:53:17 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: Fred Clift <fclift@verio.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 May 2003 14:52:14 MDT."
             <20030501143456.T43897-100000@vespa.dmz.orem.verio.net> 
Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 22:53:16 +0200
Message-ID: <3314.1051822396@critter.freebsd.dk>
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
cc: Heiko Schaefer <hschaefer@fto.de>
Subject: Re: gbde data corruption? 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 20:53:22 -0000

In message <20030501143456.T43897-100000@vespa.dmz.orem.verio.net>, Fred Clift 
writes:
>On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Heiko Schaefer wrote:
>
>> hm... cpu seems to be not the limiting factor at all - that machine has an
>> athlon 1800+ and is idle >>50% most of the time. without understanding the
>> technical details, it seems to me that working on bigger chunks of the
>> disc at a time would result in much more throughput.
>
>So how are you measuring cpu?  I seem to remember that system load average
>and stats as reported by top dont include a good chunck of code executed
>by the kernel - some does and some doesn't.

Run "top -S" and look for something like this:

  503 root      -8    0     0K    12K g_bde    0:04  0.00%  0.00% g_bde ad0s1f.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.