From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Mar 15 13:31:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from rutger.owt.com (rutger.owt.com [204.118.6.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 136D637B400 for ; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:31:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from owt.com (owt-207-41-94-232.owt.com [207.41.94.232]) by rutger.owt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19859; Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:31:10 -0800 Message-ID: <3C92681C.1030409@owt.com> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:31:08 -0800 From: Kent Stewart User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us, es-mx MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jonathan Chen Cc: Jesse Geddis , Kris Kennaway , stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: top wrong again? References: <20020315153245.B1282@grimoire.chen.org.nz> <20020316090353.A27877@grimoire.chen.org.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jonathan Chen wrote: > On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 09:38:49PM -0800, Jesse Geddis wrote: > >>here, different machine while compiling the kernel. maybe this is more >>along the lines of the original email: >> > > As another poster has said, the problem with running buildworld is > that processes get created and finish so quickly, that you rarely get > to see the process that's hogging the processor. If you hit the > bar heaps of times, you may see the "cc/as/cc1" processes hit > the chart. The best is to run the buildworld on a *slow* box (eg a > 486) and you will see all the CPU hoggers hit the top(1) charts as it > struggles through the build. I kind of smiled here. I have setiathome running and the cpu is basically always at 99%. The load averages climb above 1.0 but never too far above 2.4-5. When I do a buildworld, I have found that the fastest wall clock time is achived with no -j specified. On an AMD 1600+ XP, the difference is several minutes faster for no -j than -j4. It isn't much but 21 minutes becomes 23 and that is about 10% slower for the -j4. The system and user times vary; however, the overhead from switching tasks costs wall clock time on a single cpu. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message