From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 12 01:08:16 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1233) id AC041106566B; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:08:16 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:08:16 +0000 From: Alexander Best To: Chuck Swiger Message-ID: <20110212010816.GA1450@freebsd.org> References: <20110212002129.GA95360@freebsd.org> <2F104DA0-9420-4E7A-9023-A7C6AC5EC173@mac.com> <20110212004100.GA98882@freebsd.org> <2325F972-050A-4CA2-9900-27000776E52A@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2325F972-050A-4CA2-9900-27000776E52A@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: deciphering top(1) output X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:08:16 -0000 On Fri Feb 11 11, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Feb 11, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Alexander Best wrote: > >> It means (c). Kernel activity, short-lived transient processes, and imperfections in sampling data are the other ~13 / 10 %.... > > > > thanks. it seems in some cases these imperfections have quite an impact: > > > > last pid: 48135; load averages: 5.11, 5.38, 5.02 up 0+03:15:20 19:31:52 > > 271 processes: 15 running, 242 sleeping, 14 waiting > > CPU 0: 76.4% user, 0.0% nice, 21.7% system, 2.0% interrupt, 0.0% idle > > CPU 1: 85.0% user, 0.0% nice, 12.6% system, 2.4% interrupt, 0.0% idle > > Mem: 1078M Active, 334M Inact, 403M Wired, 79M Cache, 212M Buf, 68M Free > > Swap: 18G Total, 438M Used, 18G Free, 2% Inuse > > > > PID UID THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND > > 48131 0 1 77 0 92112K 67164K CPU1 1 0:02 17.77% cc1 > > 48135 0 1 76 0 90992K 65712K RUN 0 0:01 15.87% cc1 > > Sure. Compiling software is a classic example where lots and lots of CPU intensive, short-lived processes are started. Pay attention to last pid field; if it is steadily growing, especially at a rapid rate, lots of processes are spawning.... thanks for the hint. in this example however $pid didn't get incremented for over a minute: last pid: 14412; load averages: 0.09, 0.26, 0.29 253 processes: 3 running, 235 sleeping, 15 waiting CPU 0: 12.6% user, 0.0% nice, 7.9% system, 0.4% interrupt, 79.1% idle CPU 1: 13.8% user, 0.0% nice, 5.9% system, 0.0% interrupt, 80.3% idle Mem: 602M Active, 275M Inact, 407M Wired, 8688K Cache, 212M Buf, 669M Free Swap: 18G Total, 910M Used, 17G Free, 4% Inuse, 4K In PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 10 root 2 155 ki31 0K 32K CPU0 0 44.7H 198.88% idle 4414 arundel 24 20 0 334M 93080K uwait 0 34:56 0.00% chrome 4451 arundel 2 20 0 905M 100M kqread 0 30:12 0.00% chrome 4446 arundel 2 20 0 836M 53152K kqread 1 28:41 0.00% chrome also i noticed that when a processes CPU activity goes up to let's say 10% and then down again to 0% this doesn't mean that the idle process will jump to 200% instantly, but it takes ~ 10 seconds for it to reclaim the CPU activity that was used by the other process beforehand. cheers. alex > > Regards, > -- > -Chuck -- a13x