Re: Back in Production mode Again...

Ralf Baechle (ralf@uni-koblenz.de)
Sun, 16 Nov 1997 02:15:43 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Richard Henderson: "Re: knfsd and system crashes"
Previous message: Martin von Loewis: "Re: knfsd and system crashes"
In reply to: Simon's Mailing List Account: "Re: Back in Production mode Again..."

On Sat, Nov 15, 1997 at 11:04:40AM +0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> In general, load average as a metric is heavily overrated.
>
> Switching off whine mode and turning on useful mode: :-)
>
> Wouldn't it be cool if Linux actually defined a "busy average"?
> Something that took into consideration CPU cycles, disk arms, and
> networks? Perhaps it needs to be be a weighted triple. How
> about
>
> For all things, it is a 1/5/15 minute decaying average expressed
> as a value between 0 and 1, with 0 being idle and 1 being saturated.
>
> CPU: %CPU busy: a value between 0 and 1,
> with 0 being idle and 1 being saturated

Check /proc/uptime, it has the machine's uptime in seconds and the time
that so far has been burned in the idle loop. Which is already pretty
close to what you want.

Ralf

Next message: Richard Henderson: "Re: knfsd and system crashes"
Previous message: Martin von Loewis: "Re: knfsd and system crashes"
In reply to: Simon's Mailing List Account: "Re: Back in Production mode Again..."