On Wed, 22 May 2002 09:20:41 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> it incorrectly to a process - I seem to remember some handwaving in either
> the Keifler&McKusic or Bach books about how interrupt time is charged against
Argh. I knew that didn't look right... ;)
Leffler, McKusic, Karels, Quarterman:
On Wed, 22 May 2002 09:45:46 +0200, Peter van Dijk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Why are you benchmarking network troughput by bzip2'ing a file in
> /tmp? It makes no sense.
I'm suspecting that he's trying to indirectly measure the kernel CPU usage.
Most kernels don't give you the time spent in k
You might want to try Zebra and some actual traffic, rather than an
extremely CPU intensive compression program. Compressing a file, even
in swap, is by no means a good way to judge the aggregate throughput and
routing capabilities of a system, regardless of the OS or platform.
(That is unle
> On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 06:34:47PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> > I don't really trust the vmstat system time numbers. Based on some
> > suggestions I received, I ran some CPU intensive benchmarks during
> > different traffic loads, and determined how much system time was being
> > used by
On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 06:34:47PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> I don't really trust the vmstat system time numbers. Based on some
> suggestions I received, I ran some CPU intensive benchmarks during
> different traffic loads, and determined how much system time was being
> used by comparing
I don't really trust the vmstat system time numbers. Based on some
suggestions I received, I ran some CPU intensive benchmarks during
different traffic loads, and determined how much system time was being
used by comparing the real and user times. The results seem to show that
if I want to do
