On Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 09:48:43AM -0600, Dan Nelson wrote:
> In the last episode (Jan 19), Charles Sprickman said:
>
> > More importantly, this machine is just sitting here waiting to be put
> > in production, so I'm more than willing to play around with it like
> > this while I still can... Thanks for the ongoing help, I've never
> > touched a debugger before, and this has been educational so far. I'm
> > coming off a week or two of playing with NT machines, and it's nice
> > to at least be able to gather some info about what the machine is
> > doing with OS-supplied tools, which is something I found very
> > difficult to do in NT GUI-land.
>
> Have you tried moving the apache binary from your running server over
> to this one and see if the load goes down? I mentioned before that it
> looked like you were running two different versions of apache.
We did, and there was no difference.
To follow-up, the server is in production and is behaving well.
The load ranges from 0.08 to 3, and does not have any responsiveness
issues. One theory that was suggested to us was that 'top' itself
was the culprit. That is, there were events happening precisely
at the same time that top doing its sampling for data, giving a
higher load calculation. Since the CPU utilization was very low
and no other benchmarks were problematic, it seems like a good
assessment.
--
Omar Thameen
Systems Administration
The Internet Channel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
