Re: [perf-discuss] Re: CPU saturation vs utilization

2006-10-30 Thread Bob Sneed, SMI PAE
adrian cockcroft wrote: Could also be fsflush related, fsflush can indirectly interfere with streams/network traffic. Bob Sneed told me that the latest patches include a fix for this problem, or you can increase autoup to reduce it. Adrian: Indeed, the Change Request titled "Interim performance

[perf-discuss] Re: CPU saturation vs utilization

2006-10-30 Thread Sudarsan
Thank you for your responses. This system is a backup system's extremely busy media server and is a controlled one, without any quick lived processes. In any case, I went through previous (automated) ps traces and confirmed the absence of short lived processes (whatever information I have) Adr

Re: [perf-discuss] Re: CPU saturation vs utilization

2006-10-27 Thread adrian cockcroft
Could also be fsflush related, fsflush can indirectly interfere with streams/network traffic. Bob Sneed told me that the latest patches include a fix for this problem, or you can increase autoup to reduce it. Adrian On 10/27/06, Sean Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: By looking at this lockstat ou

[perf-discuss] Re: CPU saturation vs utilization

2006-10-27 Thread Sean Liu
By looking at this lockstat output, I suspect there are many short-lived processes forked-out and died so you can't see them with ps. Because you are not using solaris 10, You might want to enable process accounting for a minute during performance hit: /etc/init.d/acct start; sleep 60; /etc/init