> On 10 Feb 2015, at 01:55, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Sven, > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: > There is some timer thread between the image and the vm that ticks every > millisecond, that is the cause. I don't know what it does but it is > apparently needed. > > Anyway, that is how I understood it from Igor and Eliot, long ago. > > So basically, the VM is always slightly busy. > > Yet the VM is always slightly busy with the heartbeat thread, but this is > very cheap. The actual idle cost comes form the idle loop in the background > process that sends relinquishProcessorForMicroseconds:, which is a primitive > that eventually calls the select system call. This is the source of the cost.
Can we change something about that ? Maybe just as an experiment to prove your point ? > > On 09 Feb 2015, at 21:11, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I have an installation where a pharo powered hardware is used in a closed > > case. Over time that collects quite some heat. One reason for this is that > > the pharo vm is taking approx. 6% CPU all the time. The only thing that > > happens is network/sockets. I suspended the ui thread in the image but on > > this platform it doesn't help. > > Are there any tweaks to lower the polling and the activity of the image/vm > > even more? > > > > thanks, > > > > Norbert > -- > best, > Eliot
