Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:33:37 -0800 From: "David G. Lawrence" <dg@dglawrence.com> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Load over 1000 Message-ID: <20050221213337.GC87259@opteron.dglawrence.com> In-Reply-To: <45820.1109020342@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20050221210834.GB87259@opteron.dglawrence.com> <45820.1109020342@critter.freebsd.dk>
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. I said "historically". :-) This was changed in FreeBSD a some years ago. -DG David G. Lawrence President Download Technologies, Inc. - http://www.downloadtech.com - (866) 399 8500 TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com - (888) 346 7175 The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Pave the road of life with opportunities.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050221213337.GC87259>