Subject: Busy CPU under 1.3?
To: None <netbsd-help@NetBSD.ORG>
From: David Maxwell <david@fundy.ca>
List: netbsd-help
Date: 02/04/1998 09:53:18
I have two machines - a 1.2G and a 1.3, which are running qwsv, Quake
server processes.
qwsv: BSD/OS i386 compact demand paged executable
from the 1.2G machine ... which is running two of them...
quake% ps -alx | grep qwsv
666 3759 3586 12 2 4 7876 11220 select SN ?? 21:25.51 ./qwsv -port 28000 +setmaster 192.246.40.12:27006
666 5481 144 12 2 4 24624 12252 select SN ?? 129:05.72 ./qwsv +setmaster 192.246.40.12:27006
quake% ps -alx | grep qwsv
666 3759 3586 12 2 4 7876 11220 select SN ?? 21:25.52 ./qwsv -port 28000 +setmaster 192.246.40.12:27006
666 5481 144 13 2 4 24624 12252 select SN ?? 129:05.73 ./qwsv +setmaster 192.246.40.12:27006
Only shows a change in the last digit of the CPU time, (probably no one
using the servers right now)
quake% vmstat
procs memory page disk faults cpu
r b w avm fre flt re pi po fr sr w0 in sy cs us sy id
1 0 0253864 1932 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 253 839 177 7 2 91
And lots of idle CPU.
on the 1.3 machine...
quake2% ps -alx | grep qwsv
666 897 895 0 2 0 24588 11040 select S p0- 7:06.57 ./qwsv
quake2% ps -alx | grep qwsv
666 897 895 0 2 0 24588 11040 select S p0- 7:06.58 ./qwsv
Likewise, CPU isn't racing upwards....
quake2% vmstat
procs memory page disks faults cpu
r b w avm fre flt re pi po fr sr w0 f0 m0 in sy cs us sy id
0 0 0 87548 8308 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 46754 10 9 29 62
but 62% idle time, again no one using the server right now, but during
use it dropped to 2%, while the 1.2G machine stays above 85% with _two_
qwsvs running. Top also disagrees - says 99%+ idle on both machines, but
on the 1.3 server people were complaining of noticeable pauses in
gameplay, and I saw that the CPU time for qwsv was counting fast.
Both machines run not much else but these (the 1.2 has a third, non-quakeworld
quake server, but it doesn't get much usage.), top consistently reports
the qwsv processes as the cpu pigs.
Any changes in select between 1.2G and 1.3? Or perhaps in BSD emulation?
Can anyone suggest why vmstat and top disagree so widely? Vmstat seems to
be the 'right' measurement based on the complaints.
David Maxwell
david@vex.net