I was looking at the output of "top" for while and Pharo was trusting the top spot indeed.
Well, I'll look at all that this evening and give back the impressions. I want to run several instances of Pharo on the box and it will for sure add up. Say, 20 x 2% gives an awful lot. Phil On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name> wrote: > > Am 27.05.2013 um 09:49 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu>: > > BTW, load & cpu usage numbers can be very hard to interpret. > > > really? CPU usage is pretty easy and you can see this in most OSses > directly. 100% CPU usage is full :) Load isn't that much harder. It's just > the load of the scheduler queue. So if some needs a rule of thumb > > safe CPU load = number of cores/processes * 0.7 > theoretical optimal CPU load = number of core/processes > > Everything above should really be investigated because you entered the > zone where additional CPU load can drive your machine unresponsive. > You have less CPU usage but high load? Investigate I/O usage! > > I know you know that, Sven. I just wanted to mention it because this comes > up from time to time. Compared to memory consumption, CPU, scheduler and > I/O are easier targets IMHO. > > For Phil the point isn't the health of the system. It is EC2. You have to > pay for the CPU usage on EC2 so I think he had the impression there is room > for improvement. And indeed there is. But if you calculate it through it > isn't really a factor. > > Norbert > >
