From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 5 09:23:24 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715E1106564A for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:23:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk) Received: from relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net (relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net [212.159.7.100]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD1E8FC0C for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:23:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANWAKErUnw6U/2dsb2JhbAC/MwePYYQLBQ Received: from fhw-relay07.plus.net ([212.159.14.148]) by relay.pcl-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 05 Jun 2009 10:23:22 +0100 Received: from [84.92.153.232] (helo=curlew.milibyte.co.uk) by fhw-relay07.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1MCWah-0001aY-C9 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:24:03 +0100 Received: by curlew.milibyte.co.uk with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MCVdx-000CNe-Ta for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:23:22 +0100 From: Mike Clarke To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:23:21 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200906051023.21751.jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on curlew.milibyte.co.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Plusnet-Relay: 1973a79ca06110f508f6d818009b02bf Subject: Portupgrade very slow upgrading gtk-sharp X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 09:23:24 -0000 I started portupgrade -a at midnight last night. It started to upgrade gtk-sharp-1.0.10 from _14 to _15 at 00:58 and is still running more than 9 hours later and clocking up 80% to 90% CPU on both cores of my 2.5GHz Athlon. curlew:/root# top 2 last pid: 47507; load averages: 2.00, 2.05, 2.05 up 0+12:10:27 10:11:08 112 processes: 3 running, 109 sleeping CPU: 0.4% user, 7.1% nice, 91.9% system, 0.6% interrupt, 0.0% idle Mem: 405M Active, 1216M Inact, 215M Wired, 76M Cache, 112M Buf, 23M Free Swap: 2048M Total, 2048M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 35617 root 1 130 2 1336K 820K CPU1 1 548:15 96.88% script 41994 root 3 20 2 15304K 7364K kserel 0 548:29 96.58% mono curlew:/root# date Fri Jun 5 10:14:52 BST 2009 curlew:/root# ps -axuwlc | egrep '(35617|41994)' root 35617 97.4 0.0 1336 820 ?? RN 12:58AM 551:14.08 script 0 89297 561 133 2 - root 35619 0.0 0.1 1288 1180 p0 INs+ 12:58AM 0:00.16 make 0 35617 326 8 2 wait root 41994 0.0 0.4 15304 7348 p0 SN+ 12:58AM 551:28.60 mono 0 41993 561 20 2 kserel Should mono be grabbing so much CPU? It only took 8 hours to build OpenOffice earlier in the week! -- Mike Clarke