Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 3 Apr 2000 22:12:22 +0200
From:      Patrick Mau <patrick@oscar.prima.de>
To:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Load average calculation?
Message-ID:  <20000403221222.A2019@tony.dorf.wh.uni-dortmund.de>
In-Reply-To: <38E8E960.2C5A8FD5@cvzoom.net>; from dmmiller@cvzoom.net on Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 02:56:32PM -0400
References:  <200004030410.XAA75906@celery.dragondata.com> <v04220803b50e28f8c977@[194.78.233.215]> <38E8DEEF.7224C9A@geocities.com> <v0422081fb50e9396d772@[195.238.1.121]> <38E8E960.2C5A8FD5@cvzoom.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 03, 2000 at 02:56:32PM -0400, Donn Miller wrote:
> Brad Knowles wrote:
> 
> >         If there has been an actual change in how the load average is
> > calculated, then any program that changes it's behaviour based on the
> > load average may have problems.  This would certainly include SMTP
> > MTAs such as sendmail, Exim, etc....
> 
> I agree.  IMO, the load avg. formula should stick as close as possible
> to those in previous releases of FreeBSD.  OTOH, maybe those apps that
> need to query the load avg. are flawed anyways, as load avg.
> calculation tends to be system dependent.

On all Unix-like systems I know, the load average is the average mumber
of processes running during a given time interval. I can't see what use
it may have to count load for _waiting_ processes.

I/O load is not process load, if a process waits for I/O completion it does
not use up its timeslice.

> For example, FreeBSD,
> Linux, Solaris, SCO, etc. may all be running the exact same processes,
> but will the load avg. always be consistent across those platforms?  I
> think not.

I tend to disagree.

> 
> - Donn

cheers,
Patrick


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000403221222.A2019>