Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2003 15:35:21 +0200 From: Marcin Dalecki <mdcki@gmx.net> To: Thomas Dickey <dickey@radix.net> Cc: dickey@herndon4.his.com Subject: Re: /dev/shm Message-ID: <3F097719.8030301@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20030707123707.GA18750@saltmine.radix.net> References: <3F08B199.3050409@comcast.net> <3F08B79B.2040805@gmx.net> <20030707001443.GA1530@invisible-island.net> <20030707002347.GC5141@aurema.com> <20030706203440.D89894@vhost101.his.com> <3F08C4FD.8010107@gmx.net> <m3el12lf91.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> <3F09663D.9020200@gmx.net> <20030707123707.GA18750@saltmine.radix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Dickey wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 02:23:25PM +0200, Marcin Dalecki wrote: > >>You know that file system name lookup is one of the most >>expensive system calls under UNIX? > > > stating the obvious is a clumsy rhetorical ploy (asking for agreement without > making a point). The point is that this is one of the reasons why the top command in question takes a lot of relative CPU time under Linux. Some "faster" versions of procps utils try to cache data but the trade off is simply the fact that the results are not 100% accurate. I tought this was obvious?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3F097719.8030301>