Re: [Lse-tech] Re: 15000+ processes -- poor performance ?!

Alex Tomas
2002-12-19T10:37:31Z

>>>>> William Lee Irwin (WLI) writes:

WLI> On 19 December 2002 00:05, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>>> Well, a better solution would be a userspace free of /proc/
>>> dependency. Or actually fixing the kernel. proc_pid_readdir()
>>> wants an efficiently indexable linear list, e.g. TAOCP's 6.2.3
>>> "Linear List Representation". At that point its expense is
>>> proportional to the buffer size and "seeking" about the list as
>>> it is wont to do is O(lg(processes)).

WLI> On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 01:05:03PM -0200, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
>> A short-time solution: run top d 30 to make it refresh only every
>> 30 seconds. This will greatly reduce top's own load skew.

WLI> As userspace solutions go your suggestions is just as good. The
WLI> kernel still needs to get its act together and with some
WLI> urgency.

what about retreiving info from /proc/kmem or something like? just to
avoid binary -> text(proc) -> binary