Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 22:12:22 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: "David G. Lawrence" <dg@dglawrence.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Load over 1000 Message-ID: <45820.1109020342@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:08:34 PST." <20050221210834.GB87259@opteron.dglawrence.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20050221210834.GB87259@opteron.dglawrence.com>, "David G. Lawrence" writes: >> aren't being serviced isn't a bug. The reason the load on systems with >> many processes is typically low is that most processes are blocked on I/O >> -- either waiting for it to complete, waing for a network packet, or >> waiting for the user, so they're idle the rest of the time. The CPU sits >> there waiting for the world to catch up... > > The load average has historically meant the number of processes either >running/ready to run OR blocked by short term (disk I/O) wait. No, disk I/O sleeps is not involved. The loadavg is the length of the runqueue. Any process sleeping, on network, disk or timer, is not counted towards the total. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45820.1109020342>