From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jul 23 6:11:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from axl.noc.iafrica.com (axl.noc.iafrica.com [196.31.1.175]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9951571A; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 06:10:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sheldonh@axl.noc.iafrica.com) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.noc.iafrica.com) by axl.noc.iafrica.com with local-esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 117f4a-000Awu-00; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:09:12 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Andre Albsmeier Cc: Brian Feldman , hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/inetd builtins.c inetd.h In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200." <19990723150602.B10047@internal> Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:09:12 +0200 Message-ID: <42091.932735352@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote: > But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%. Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-) > On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > > What does "sucking all the CPU time" mean? Does it mean that other > > programs were suffering, or does it mean that it was the only > > significant user of CPU and so showed up at close to 100% CPU usage? I don't care how the usage is split over syslog and inetd. What I want to know is whether their combined usage of the CPU causes a serious problem for other CPU-bound processes. After all, you _have_ asked the inetd+syslog pair to do a lot of work. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message