>So it's easy to imagine that ~100 threads or more > could give you these results.So, you mean that the result I got is the > aggregation number of all threads? I agree with that. >so the thread is asleep and other threads >can be making forward progress; lwp_cond_wait(), lwp_park(), and pollsys() >in particular. So even on a low-CPU count machine, you could have hundreds >of threads sleeping. Sorry I didn't understand. How did you conclude that?
>If you change the script to replace 'timestamp' with 'vtimestamp', that will >only record the on-CPU time, which will be much lower, since all time sleeping >won't be counted By "on-CPU", do you mean the active thread? Regards, Mahmood ------------------------------------------- dtrace-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184261/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184261/25769126-e243886f Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769126&id_secret=25769126-8d47a7b2 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
