On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 15:09:12 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 23 Jul 1999 15:06:02 +0200, Andre Albsmeier wrote:
>
> > But when inetd is run without -l it get 100%.
>
> Are you avoiding my question on purpose? :-)
Sorry. The machine wasn't stressed by other programs so
it was "the only significant user of CPU and so showed up at
close to 100% CPU usage". But when I logged into it to kill
and restart inetd the machine was responding very slow.
> > On Fri, 23-Jul-1999 at 14:29:19 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> >
> > > What does "sucking all the CPU time" mean? Does it mean that other
> > > programs were suffering, or does it mean that it was the only
> > > significant user of CPU and so showed up at close to 100% CPU usage?
>
> I don't care how the usage is split over syslog and inetd. What I want
> to know is whether their combined usage of the CPU causes a serious
> problem for other CPU-bound processes.
Yes.
>
> After all, you _have_ asked the inetd+syslog pair to do a lot of work.
Why? I start nmap, it scans the ports and inetd has for sure a lot of
logging work to do. But at some time, the scan is finished but inetd
continues to consume CPU time endlessly.
Maybe I am just confused and this behaviour is normal ...
-Andre
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
