Bill Waggoner: > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Gordon Morehouse <[email protected]> wrote: >> Michael Berlin: [snip] >>> there. Monitoring everything with "arm" is also nice but far too CPU >>> intensive. >> >> A quick thought - can we pull together data on tor monitoring utilities >> and then figure out the best bang for armhf CPU buck? >> >> 'nload' is good, but doesn't tell me much about *tor's* condition (other >> than it's probably not dead if there's still traffic flowing). It'd be >> nice to have some notion of circuits open, circuit creation rate, and >> tor's memory and CPU usage all on one screen, like 'arm', but lighter. >> >> I agree about 'arm', BTW. I use it for tuning on my x86-based relays, >> but it's buggy and it is really too heavy for the Pi's CPU. Maybe I >> should try to see if I can get 'arm' to run under PyPy[1] - I wonder if >> PyPy is faster on armhf like it can be on x86 and amd64. >> >> [1] http://pypy.org/
I've submitted a ticket to the Tor Project trac about this, full well realizing that my current main role is spewing ideas around with basically zero time to help implement them. :( https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/9403 -Gordon _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
