|
Re: Constraining CPU usage: msg#00009os.freebsd.performance
--- Shane Ambler <Shane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 3/12/2005 3:14, "Arne Woerner" > <arne_woerner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Why should somebody want to keep CPU usage of a > > process below a certain value (e. g. 20%)? > > Well if your machine isn't smp enabled (specifically > pre-HTT) then one process can slow the server down > to a point where your web/databse server can't get > processor time to give a response - effectively making > it non existent for the duration. > Hmm... Isn't that problem solved already by nice'ing a process? I think that problem is completely solved by idprio'ing a process... Because: When the NIC gets a packet for a database server, the kernel interrupts the executing of a potential idprio'ed process and starts the DB process... Or am I wrong? -Arne __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL ? Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ freebsd-performance@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx" |
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| Previous by Date: | Re: Constraining CPU usage: 00009, Shane Ambler |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Constraining CPU usage: 00009, Nash Nipples |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Constraining CPU usagei: 00009, Shane Ambler |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Constraining CPU usage: 00009, Nash Nipples |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
| News | FAQ | advertise |