Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:13:27 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> To: tcrimi+@andrew.cmu.edu (Thomas Valentino Crimi) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kvm question Message-ID: <199901252213.OAA18042@bubba.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <MqetTuS00UwH0PBLI0@andrew.cmu.edu> from Thomas Valentino Crimi at "Jan 24, 99 05:00:26 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas Valentino Crimi writes: > > Whether libkvm should even exist in a perfect world (it shouldn't) > > is an entirely different question. For now, we're stuck with it > > until somebody changes *everything* to use sysctl instead. > > Just as a question, how much of a performance difference is there > between using libkvm and sysctl? If I were looking for a way to keep > constant tabs on system performance with the minimal impact (think top, > xsysinfo, sysstat, etc), which would I want to use if any difference > exists at all? > > My suspicion would be that sysctl might actually be faster unless > libkvm mmap's /dev/kmem so then that would elimiate the need for > syscalls. libkvm is probably faster, but it really doesn't matter because they're both probably about the same and the application for this stuff is not performance critical. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901252213.OAA18042>