This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hold on there Tonto! I said nothing of the sort. If you're gonna put words in my mouth then please refrain for claiming that I insulted somebody else in the manner you did above. I didn't say that the Cygwin devs didn't understand what a loadavg is and I hardly called them stupid. You should be ashamed of yourself for making such a leap of misjudgment and then pinning it on me!IMHO it's 100% better than just outputting 0's. Putting out 0's gives you no info at all!Bollocks. You'd be the first to complain that those stupid Cygwin devs don't even understand what an average is.
I beg to differ. 0% is indistinguishable from "the machine was not busy at all". IOW it *could* say "that information was not available" and it *could* as easily say "the load avg was actually 0%". You can't tell so it's hardly "pretty clearly". Indeed reporting say a negative number would impart more information as the user would say "Huh?!?" and then perhaps the man page could explain that a negative number is returned because this information is not easily obtainable by Cygwin under Window. But reporting 0 is by definition ambiguous!The 0% tells you pretty clearly that that information is not available.
Thanks for pointing out where they can find the info.And surely you'd be able to find it at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library.I beg to differ. I don't see how having 0 values is better than some approximation of load. Surely Windows has some measurement of the number of processes in the run queue.
This is surely a subjective opinion. You're opinion is "hardly". Mine is "good start".Hardly.A simple count of the number of processes with CPU usage> 0 (minus the system idle) process would be a good start.
While any of the 1, 5 or 15 minutes would be challenging as you say here, I still maintain that an instantaneous measure to substitute for at least the 1 minute figure would be an improvement over just putting out 0. You are free to maintain a different opinion just as I am free to hold this one.The challenge here is to actually collect the data for the last 15 minutes, so you'd be looking either at some sort of service process waking up frequently to sample the CPU state, or some unholy and unreliable scheme where Cygwin functions go off and do that every now and then before doing their actual job.
-- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |