From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed May 27 11:58:00 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA02698 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:58:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from xcf.berkeley.edu (scam.XCF.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.43.201]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA02646 for ; Wed, 27 May 1998 11:57:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nordwick@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu) Received: (qmail 4166 invoked from network); 27 May 1998 18:59:29 -0000 Received: from ip12.san-francisco22.ca.pub-ip.psi.net (HELO scam.xcf.berkeley.edu) (38.28.60.12) by scam.xcf.berkeley.edu with SMTP; 27 May 1998 18:59:29 -0000 Message-ID: <356C5E73.F885CBE4@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu> Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 11:41:55 -0700 From: Jason Nordwick X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sbabkin@dcn.att.com CC: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Load avg 0.33 and 99.2% idle... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG sbabkin@dcn.att.com wrote: > > It sounds weird to me. The program doing select() sleeps like > any others and do not reside in the run queue. But, on the > other hand, the load computations are based on sampling on > timer interrupts, so if some program is activated on time > intervals, like select() with timeout, the timer interrupt > will encounter longer run queue because itself had woken up > these processes and placed them into the run queue right > before computing the load. I think this explanation is > closer to reality. > > That raises an interesting issue: should the > load computation use the average of run queue length before > and after waking up the time-awaiting processes ? > > -Serge > Doesn't the soft (hard?) clock (still dont really know the difference well) operate on a random jitter to reduce this problem? Or does that only reduce the ability of a clock driven program to hog the CPU, by not getting charged for its time? Jay -- 4.4 > 95 http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message