On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 10:29, Barton Robinson wrote: > I am unaware of any product other than ESALPS on the market > that is either aware of this problem or addresses > it. Linux monitors do NOT have the ability to correct this > problem - they are unaware they are virtualized.
They still have some utility: their absolute numbers--packets per second, for instance--are accurate. And measurements of Linux processes vis-a-vis each other (i.e. "Samba appears to be eating about three times as much storage and four times as much CPU as named") are reasonably accurate, although that fluctuates a lot in any Linux system, virtualized or not. However, yes, as Barton says, anything that measures performance relative to the Linux image capacity is basically useless, since effectively the speed of the machine is varying wildly as VM does its thing (remember that what Linux considers core storage may actually be out in VM's page space somewhere, so not just CPU performance but memory access times are enormously variable). So it tells you nothing that some process is consuming X% of the Linux image's CPU unless you're either running the image at a fixed priority--which I hope you're not--or you have some way to correlate that with what VM says the image itself is doing. Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
