On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:07:07AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote: > Quoting Alex Kozlov <s...@rm-rf.kiev.ua>: > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 05:51:42PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > >> 2009/10/19 Alex Kozlov <s...@rm-rf.kiev.ua>: > >> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 04:35:08PM +0200, Ivan Voras wrote: > >> >> >> if nobody objects, I'll commit it :) > >> >> > > >> >> > I seem to recall that setproctitle() is quite expensive to > >> call; perhaps > >> >> > it would make sense offer a flag to prevent make(1) from > >> calling it? [1] > >> >> > > >> >> > Anyway, the feature looks nice! I'd like to have it... > >> >> > > >> >> > [1] I'm unsure how expensive it is compared to fork(1)-ing etc; I'd > >> >> > expect it's negligable but who knows... > >> >> > >> >> The loop it's called in is not processed bazillion times per second > >> >> (though it *is* called surprisingly often; small, fast jobs can result > >> >> in somewhere in the order of magnitude of 100 iterations per second on > >> >> a fast CPU). As you said - I expect it's negligable compared to fork() > >> >> and the work jobs themselves do. > >> > How about add this statistic to make info handler? > >> You mean SIGINFO? > > Yes > > Using SIGINFO sounds nice, but make produces so much output that > normally you won't see the result because it is scrolled up just after > sending the signal. Of course ps or top output much more convenient, but if setproctitle so expencive and will be called so often, then SIGINFO may be good compromise.
-- Adios _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
