On Feb 11, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> also i noticed that when a processes CPU activity goes up to let's say 10% and
> then down again to 0% this doesn't mean that the idle process will jump to
> 200%
> instantly, but it takes ~ 10 seconds for it to reclaim the CPU activity that
> w
On Fri Feb 11 11, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> >> It means (c). Kernel activity, short-lived transient processes, and
> >> imperfections in sampling data are the other ~13 / 10 %
> >
> > thanks. it seems in some cases these imperfections have qui
On Feb 11, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
>> It means (c). Kernel activity, short-lived transient processes, and
>> imperfections in sampling data are the other ~13 / 10 %
>
> thanks. it seems in some cases these imperfections have quite an impact:
>
> last pid: 48135; load averag
On Fri Feb 11 11, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2011, at 4:21 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> > a) my system is 100% idle, since no processes except the idle process takes
> > up
> > up CPU time or
> > b) that a or some processes take up 2% CPU time which aren't being shown or
> > c) that each of
On Feb 11, 2011, at 4:21 PM, Alexander Best wrote:
> a) my system is 100% idle, since no processes except the idle process takes up
> up CPU time or
> b) that a or some processes take up 2% CPU time which aren't being shown or
> c) that each of my cpu core is only 86.6/89.4% idle?
It means (c).
