From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 22 14:36:21 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E42CE16A41F for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:36:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pobox@verysmall.org) Received: from thing.verysmall.org (thing.verysmall.org [212.100.226.116]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C193343D48 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:36:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pobox@verysmall.org) Received: (qmail 94631 invoked by uid 89); 22 Aug 2005 14:56:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org@62.47.146.140) by thing.verysmall.org with SMTP; 22 Aug 2005 14:56:10 -0000 Message-ID: <4309E2DB.1070000@verysmall.org> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:36:11 +0200 From: "pobox@verysmall.org" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.0+ (Windows/20050815) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mario Hoerich References: <4309C9F7.3070904@verysmall.org> <20050822142101.GB74593@Pandora.MHoerich.de> In-Reply-To: <20050822142101.GB74593@Pandora.MHoerich.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: top -I and load average from 4.9 into 5.4 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: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 14:36:22 -0000 >> We upgraded from 4.9 to 5.4 and the 'top -I' and load average seem to >> behave slightly different. 'top -I' in 5.4 stays empty most of the time >> with processes flashing in and out from time to time. > > Well, I'd actually expect them to, as -I filters out any idle > process. Justed tested on my 6.0B2, major CPU hogs are shown > as expected. That's clear. Just on the same server under 4.9 somehow the processes tend to 'stay longer' and not just flash for parts of the second. Now under 5.4 the list 'top -I' is most of the time empty while the CPU goes from 0% to 20% and back all the time. And just very seldom a process flashes in the list. 'top' under 5.4 shows all the time 3-5 active processes at the top of the list. >> In 4.9 the processes stayed there until they are done. > > Where's the difference to top [-i], then? 'top' shows a long list with active and not active. 'top -I' shows just the active ones, but as some take few seconds - they do stay there for few seconds (under 4.9). Under 5.4 they either do not show or if they show - it is for parts of the second. > I don't really know enough about how load and utilization > are calculated. I'd guess load is calculated by the scheduler, > based on the number of processes whining for more/larger time > slices, whereas utilization is guessimated elsewhere, probably > something like process CPU time / available CPU time. > > I'm none too sure there's an actual correlation between these > values, let alone load 1 = utilization 100%. I had this feeling. So that's clear. Just the question is now why 'top -I' under 5.4 is so quiet. Has something changed in 5.x or is it a question of setup? Iv