Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:08:21 +0000 From: Andrew Humphries <humphie@ucip.boyko.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux port..... Message-ID: <1067260100.6768.2.camel@revelation.home.net> In-Reply-To: <200310271252.h9RCq1C22058@anon.securenym.net> References: <20031024214427.22367.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com> <1067042620.38004.1429.camel@verdammt.falcotronic.net> <200310271252.h9RCq1C22058@anon.securenym.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 13:51, C. Ulrich wrote: > On Sat, 2003-10-25 at 00:43, andi payn wrote: > > 4. While running a similar set of services, FreeBSD may be using less > > background processing time. Or maybe not. I definitely see significantly > > lower CPU usage (idling under X, FreeBSD shows about 2-10% CPU, linux > > about 15-35%). However, this may just be an artifact of linux's > > notoriously bad reporting, or the fact that I'm using the O(1) kernel > > and preemptible kernel patches, or maybe something stupid some GNOME > > applet is doing because I configured it wrong under linux; who knows.... > > Check with top to see which processes are using the CPU. For me, 9 times > out of 10, it's the X server itself taking up cycles for doing nothing. > It won't do it right after a fresh boot, but some program along the way > usually triggers the siphoning of the CPU usage. > > Charles Ulrich I have found this an awful lot whilst running X under Linux. After a fresh boot, with nothing running, it works nicely. Give it a couple open applications, and even when nothing is running except X itself, it will take up extra CPU time and physical memory space until freshly booted again. Regards, -- Andrew Humphries <humphie@ucip.boyko.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1067260100.6768.2.camel>