From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Nov 7 16:31:35 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from fw.wintelcom.net (ns1.wintelcom.net [209.1.153.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058CC37B4C5 for ; Tue, 7 Nov 2000 16:31:32 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bright@localhost) by fw.wintelcom.net (8.10.0/8.10.0) id eA80VRI16500; Tue, 7 Nov 2000 16:31:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 16:31:27 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: The Hermit Hacker Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: How to measure load on system CPUs ... Message-ID: <20001107163127.M5112@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20001107134325.D5112@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: ; from scrappy@hub.org on Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 08:06:28PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * The Hermit Hacker [001107 16:06] wrote: > On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > * The Hermit Hacker [001107 11:58] wrote: > > > > > > How accurate is top considered for determining spare CPU cycles? Is there > > > a better way of determinig if I need faster CPUs? > > > > Top is quite accurate. But sometimes it's not the CPU that's a > > problem, it could be an incorrectly coded program busy-waiting on > > some event that's causing a lot of CPU to be used. A faster > > processor might help, but not if you're at 100% because of busy > > looping. > > PostgreSQL is the only thing that runs on that server ... :) I hope its > not that ... It's possible, I've seen postgresql get stuck in 100% CPU utilization however with the latest (almost) 7.0.3 stuff I haven't seen it. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message