Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:17:13 -0800 (PST) From: Jonathan Stewart <jonstew1983@yahoo.com> To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Discrepancy between ps -i -o inblk and figuring numbers by hand Message-ID: <20050326041713.25506.qmail@web50905.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: 6667
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote: > On 2005-03-25 10:08, Jonathan Stewart <jonstew1983@yahoo.com> wrote: > > --- Giorgos Keramidas keramida at ceid dot upatras dot gr wrote: > > > So, what you are looking for is a single byte count that > increases > > > sequentially for all read() and write() system calls? > > > > Pretty much, yes. To be specific all read() and write() calls for a > > given process. Even something that counted in 512 byte or > UFUFSlocks > > would be useful. > > To what end, may I ask? Per process statistics may include byte > counts from a > few thousand threads that read and/or write from a few hundred > descriptors. > > Even per file descriptor statistics quickly get useless when one > considers > that a single byte read may cause the read-ahead of a few thousand > bytes or > that a single write may reach the corresponding device several > seconds later. > As I mentioned in an earlier email my main use of this is really just for one program. I can do a du to find out how much information it needs to read and then by watching how much it has read get a rough idea of how much longer it will be. Not really a necessary feature just a "nice to have" kind of thing. Jonathan __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050326041713.25506.qmail>