Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*cpu\s+times\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*cpu\s+times\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. cpu times (score: 1): Author: Madhu Sudhan R Tera <mst9696@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 02:07:54 -0500 (CDT); Hi, In continuation to the previous discussion about the cpu times, I want to clarify about the cpu & user times of migrated process. i.e If a process is migrated to a different machine, (say by usin; /archives/pcp/2002-05/msg00000.html (6,416 bytes)
2. cpu times (score: 1): Author: Madhu Sudhan R Tera <mst9696@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 02:07:54 -0500 (CDT); Hi, In continuation to the previous discussion about the cpu times, I want to clarify about the cpu & user times of migrated process. i.e If a process is migrated to a different machine, (say by usin; /archives/pcp/2002-05/msg00009.html (6,416 bytes)
3. cpu times (score: 1): Author: Madhu Sudhan R Tera <mst9696@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 03:39:20 -0500 (CDT); Hello All! we are working on project which requires calculation of %cpu usages for each process running on a particular machine. So I want to know if the following is correct or not: kernel.all.cpu.u; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00006.html (7,189 bytes)
4. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 18:44:38 +1000 (EST); It will be fairly accurate, provided you don't include kernel.all.cpu.idle in the system wide calculation. There will be some variation because you can't sample all processes at the same instant in t; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00007.html (7,499 bytes)
5. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Ken McDonell <kenmcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 06:10:11 +1000; As Mark already noted, do not include kernel.all.cpu.idle. But these are counters, so you need to make 2 observations separated by some time, say t1 and t2, and thus kernel.all.cpu.user@t2 - kernel.a; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00008.html (8,756 bytes)
6. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 06:59:43 +1000 (EST); Actually, last time I looked (pre 2.4.x) interrupt time in the Linux kernel is not included in any kernel times. Also, on Linux user time is split into two metrics ("user" and "nice"), so you also ne; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00009.html (7,174 bytes)
7. cpu times (score: 1): Author: Madhu Sudhan R Tera <mst9696@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 03:39:20 -0500 (CDT); Hello All! we are working on project which requires calculation of %cpu usages for each process running on a particular machine. So I want to know if the following is correct or not: kernel.all.cpu.u; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00016.html (7,189 bytes)
8. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 18:44:38 +1000 (EST); It will be fairly accurate, provided you don't include kernel.all.cpu.idle in the system wide calculation. There will be some variation because you can't sample all processes at the same instant in t; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00017.html (7,547 bytes)
9. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Ken McDonell <kenmcd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 06:10:11 +1000; As Mark already noted, do not include kernel.all.cpu.idle. But these are counters, so you need to make 2 observations separated by some time, say t1 and t2, and thus kernel.all.cpu.user@t2 - kernel.a; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00018.html (8,804 bytes)
10. Re: cpu times (score: 1): Author: Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 06:59:43 +1000 (EST); Actually, last time I looked (pre 2.4.x) interrupt time in the Linux kernel is not included in any kernel times. Also, on Linux user time is split into two metrics ("user" and "nice"), so you also ne; /archives/pcp/2002-04/msg00019.html (7,224 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]