Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:42:23 -0600 From: Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Cc: void <float@firedrake.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "iowait" CPU state Message-ID: <20001110104223.B21494@dan.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <xzplmusjjoh.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>; from "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" on Fri Nov 10 09:49:34 GMT 2000 References: <20001107054413.A1983@firedrake.org> <xzpu29jx1b9.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20001109175050.C21468@firedrake.org> <xzplmusjjoh.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Nov 10), Dag-Erling Smorgrav said: > void <float@firedrake.org> writes: > > Is there any reason top couldn't add these up and report a %iowait > > like Solaris'? > > Yes. It would conceal valuable information. Do the adding up in your > head. I can't see how it would conceal information, since it would simply change "90% idle" to "10% idle 80% iowait". -- Dan Nelson dnelson@emsphone.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20001110104223.B21494>