From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 27 19:06:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5908116A420; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:06:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Adam.Mullen@c-b.com) Received: from FW1-AP69.c-b.com (translation.c-b.com [216.141.109.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7607B43D55; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:06:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Adam.Mullen@c-b.com) Received: from (172.16.5.23) by FW1-AP69.c-b.com via smtp id 20c2_5a93d46a_8f67_11da_9615_001143cddd1e; Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:01:42 -0600 Received: from fw1-ex03.c-b.net ([172.16.5.21]) by fw1-ex06.c-b.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:06:27 -0600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:06:26 -0600 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches Thread-Index: AcYjdCi5B1dAU6HrRySqZTXCigQmUgAAD3awAAASvEA= From: "Mullen, Adam" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Jan 2006 19:06:27.0200 (UTC) FILETIME=[C6048000:01C62374] X-NAIMIME-Disclaimer: 1 X-NAIMIME-Modified: 1 Cc: Subject: FW: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:06:39 -0000 =20 Yes, I clearly understand. My point still stands though, if an admin wishes to use power saving techniques for whatever reason, that choice shouldn't deter the rest of us from gaining a more precise accountability for our CPU cycles. Thus why I suggested a blurb be added with this patch stating the ramifications of using power saving techniques with this method of cycle sampling. =20 -----Original Message----- From: Garance A Drosihn [mailto:drosih@rpi.edu] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:02 PM To: Mullen, Adam Cc: arch@freebsd.org; freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: [TEST/REVIEW] CPU accounting patches At 12:39 PM -0600 1/27/06, Mullen, Adam wrote: >Lets see here though, how many of us have a 100 node beowulf cluster=20 >who use FreeBSD daily? I know I don't! That isn't the question I am answering. The question was "Who in their right mind users power saving features on a server OS?". And the answer is "People who run LOTS of servers". That is all. I'm not saying *you* have to run power-saving features. I am saying that there are people who use a SERVER operating system, and who have very good ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$) reasons to care about power consumption. People who on the one hand do want infinite CPU power, but still have to balance that desire with the monthly bill for energy and cooling. --=20 Garance Alistair Drosehn =3D gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu This message contains confidential information and is intended only for t= he individual named. If you are not the named addressee=0D you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify= the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this =0D e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmi= ssion cannot be guaranteed to be secured or error-free as=0D information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, received la= te or incomplete, or could contain viruses. The sender therefore =0D does not accept liability for any error or omission in the contents of th= is message, which arises as a result of e-mail transmission. =0D If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version from the = sender.