Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 12:20:31 -0400 From: "Gary Palmer" <gpalmer@freebsd.org> To: Thomas J Balfe <tbalfe@falcon.tioga.com> Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: process table? Message-ID: <25781.838225231@orion.webspan.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 24 Jul 1996 11:51:22 EDT." <Pine.BSF.3.91.960724114554.16255A-100000@falcon.tioga.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thomas J Balfe wrote in message ID
<Pine.BSF.3.91.960724114554.16255A-100000@falcon.tioga.com>:
> Here's my least favorite of today.
> falcon: {27} ps aux | grep tbalfe
> tbalfe 16241 0.0 0.1 632 12 p0 RV 31Dec69 0:00.00 -tcsh (tcsh)
> tbalfe 16198 0.0 3.4 632 1024 p0 Ds 11:41AM 0:00.63 -tcsh (tcsh)
> tbalfe 16240 0.0 0.9 452 268 p0 R+ 11:43AM 0:00.01 ps -aux
> 31Dec69?
I've seen this ... the process is often VERY short lived and very
recently, so for some reason early in the initialisation the process
start date is messed up. Once the process has been around for a
context switch or two it's ok generally. Judging by the process ID's,
it was probably the process that started the grep, so it could be
something to do with the exec call.
Gary
--
Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member
FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?25781.838225231>