Re: Division of Load Average

[sena seneviratne]

Arjan and Balbir,

Yes as discussed and agreed upon with Nagar and balbir  4 years ago this is 
how they are listed

Loadavg(1), Loadavg(5), Loadavg(15)
rootloadavg
uid_1    CPUload_1   DiskLoad_1
uid_2   CPUload_2   DiskLoad_2
uid_3   CPUload_3   DiskLoad_3

-----------------------------------------------

uid_n    CPUload_n   DiskLoad_n

Thanks
Sena Seneviratne



At 08:43 PM 10/1/2008 -0700, you wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 06:58:45 -0400
> auntvini@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > My self and my superviosr Dr David Levy have been working on
> > introduction of new kernel code to correct the inherent problem of
> > calculating load avarage by the current kernel. We have posted many
> > e-mails in this regard since 2003 and kernel has been updated under
> > the supervision of Rusty Russel.
> >
> > Also we had interactions with IBM group(balbir@xxxxxxxxxx)  who was
> > engaged in delayed stat calculations.
> >
> > We emphasise the following facts
> > (1) seperation of Disk IO load from CPU load
> >
> > This comes as a correction to the existing kernel as the calculation
> > of the existing kernel load average is based on the arithmatic
> > addition of Disk IO and CPU loads
>
> while you can argue if including disk makes sense or not, it's 20+
> years of tradition on Linux, and more on Unix.
>
> So.. whatever you do (and I think there's some sense in splitting
> things out).. please only *add* stats, don't replace the existing ones.
>
> --
> Arjan van de Ven        Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
> visit http://www.lesswatts.org

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/