On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 04:10:07PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote: > On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 21:12:27 -0800 > 39066...@gmail.com wrote: > > > I'm using runit as my primary init on Linux to good effect but have > > noticed that it accumulates CPU time even while the system is idle. I > > How much time in how much uptime? Which process are you looking at with > this accumulated time? Here's what I get:
runsvdir has used 1m 55s over a bit under 5 days. The runsv instances are way less (but then they have no reason to wake). Load average is 0.00. > On my computer, none of this in any practical way affects my computing. > I would guess on a more heavily used computer, any deleterious effects > of runit time consumption could be solved by running runsvdir and all > the runsv's with a positive nice value. > > In my opinion, by far the greatest benefit of runit is its simplicity, > and there's no way I'd trade that for a theoretical efficiency benefit. That sounds sensible on a desktop. In my case the motivation is to trim a source of power draw for an image that's going to run on a battery-powered device that will be awake but idle a lot of the time. Why Linux? Pretty much familiarity & tooling, if power is ok then I get to have my cake and eat it too.
