Dne sobota 11 april 2009 ob 15:58:35 je Douglas A. Tutty napisal(a): > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 03:46:31PM +0200, Klistvud wrote: > > Dne sobota 11 april 2009 ob 15:22:38 je Douglas A. Tutty napisal(a): > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 02:26:30PM +0200, Aleksa ??u??uli?? wrote: > > > > I agree ... to a point. Namely, I've never managed to overheat the unit > > by just _using_ the CPU. It exclusively happens: > > > > 1) during a Debian Lenny installation > > 2) during a certain type of system lock-up which forces both the CPU > > frequency and its usage to go to 100%. > > > > I'd compare (if I may) the situation with a car having, say, a range of 0 > > to 7000 RPM, of which only 2000 to 5000 is actually the "working range". > > Now, forcing the car in a very low gear and running it at a constant 7000 > > RPM, how many minutes until the engine overheats? And, more importantly: > > how _stupid_ should one be to actually try doing this at home? It's, in > > my opinion, what's happening here: some runaway process or OS flaw simply > > ramps up the CPU to a regime that wasn't intended to be used for a > > prolonged time in the first place. In normal usage, leaving a CPU running > > at 100% usage is a rare occurence (I'm not talking about CPU frequency > > here, I'm talking about CPU usage - 100% meaning no idle cycles > > whatsoever over several minutes or even hours!). > > What about a big compile? Retouching a movie? > > For normal usage (other than using iceweasel), I have difficulty getting > my dual PII-450 to less than 90% idle, but there are things that will > bog it down, and no it doesn't overheat. Then again, its a 2U server, > not a laptop. > > Doug.
A good case in point. And firefox/iceweasel is _definitely_ a CPU hog. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
