From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: David Lang <dlang@diginsite.com>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
Till Immanuel Patzschke <tip@inw.de>,
lse-tech <lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 15000+ processes -- poor performance ?!
Date: 18 Dec 2002 20:42:58 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1040262178.855.106.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0212181717510.7848-100000@dlang.diginsite.com>
On Wed, 2002-12-18 at 20:20, David Lang wrote:
> Ok, I wasn't sure of the cause, but I've seen this as far back as 2.2 I
> had a machine trying to run 2000 processes under 2.2 and 2.4.0 (after
> upping the 2.2 kernel limit) and top would cost me ~40% throughput on the
> machine (while claiming it was useing ~5% of the CPU)
Yah a lot of it is like William is saying... you just do not want to
read multiple files for each process in /proc when you have a kajillion
processes, and that is what top does. Over and over.
Work has gone into 2.5 to make this a lot better.. If you use threads
with NPTL in 2.5, a lot of this is resolved, since the sub-threads will
not show up in as /proc/#/ entries.
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-19 1:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-12-19 0:46 15000+ processes -- poor performance ?! Till Immanuel Patzschke
2002-12-19 0:47 ` [Lse-tech] " Martin J. Bligh
2002-12-19 0:53 ` Till Immanuel Patzschke
2002-12-19 1:15 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 1:12 ` David Lang
2002-12-19 1:25 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 1:20 ` David Lang
2002-12-19 1:36 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 1:42 ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-12-19 1:44 ` David Lang
2002-12-19 2:05 ` [Lse-tech] " William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 15:05 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-12-19 10:27 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 10:37 ` Alex Tomas
2002-12-19 10:55 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 15:24 ` Martin J. Bligh
2002-12-19 15:15 ` Denis Vlasenko
2002-12-19 1:24 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 0:59 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-12-19 1:11 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-12-19 14:59 ` Denis Vlasenko
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-19 1:04 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2002-12-19 1:13 ` Robert Love
2002-12-19 2:31 ` Alan Cox
2002-12-19 1:58 ` Rik van Riel
2002-12-19 2:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1040262178.855.106.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=dlang@diginsite.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=tip@inw.de \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.