On 12/30/2010 08:41 PM, David Antliff wrote:
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:27, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
On 12/30/2010 06:05 PM, David Antliff wrote:
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 08:23, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
Well that sucks. Surely Windows has some means of reporting how busy the
system is. uptime should use that.
But then they wouldn't be actual load averages where most
people/programs expected to see load averages.
-- David
Understood, but current real load averages be calculated? Besides wouldn't
those people who expect to see real load averages (i.e. me!) be disappointed
to only see 0's?!? IOW wouldn't even fake load averages be better than just
always 0?!?
The "load average" is a bit more complicated than just how busy the
system is - it's related to the number of processes waiting for the
CPU, with some time-weighted averaging and a few other herbs and
spices. I'm no Windows system programmer so I don't even know if that
sort of information is even available to Cygwin.
I do understand what load average is. What I'm saying is 0 is unhelpful.
I 'discovered' this zero thing myself last year when I was trying to
incorporate some sort of logging into a build system I wrote to run in
Cygwin - I had hoped to compare 'machine load' over multiple builds
over time, but as you know, you just get zeroes. So I just used build
timing metrics instead (i.e. the 'time' command). Personally I
wouldn't mind a Cygwin/Windows-specific measurement that provided some
sort of "how busy is the machine" metric (one probably exists -
anyone?) but I think it might be better to not overload the "load
average" fields as they are pretty specific in their meaning.
IMHO it's 100% better than just outputting 0's. Putting out 0's gives
you no info at all!
In my opinion, I think it's better to have zero values rather than
anything fake. A consistent and reasonable 'estimate' (if possible)
would be OK for my purposes but I can't speak for anyone else.
I beg to differ. I don't see how having 0 values is better than some
approximation of load. Surely Windows has some measurement of the number
of processes in the run queue. A simple count of the number of processes
with CPU usage > 0 (minus the system idle) process would be a good
start. Both the Task Manager and Process Explorer can show this so the
info is there.
--
Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
Why are they called stairs inside but steps outside?
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
