Hi

I have read the highlighted code. But I don't understand some part of code.
Like highlighted one


   1. struct disk_stats
   2.          *sdi = st_disk[curr],
   3.         @@ *sdj;


This is built in structure or enumerated or .....


kindly reply me



On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Yakoob, M. Kazi M. <[email protected]>wrote:

> Thanks Saifi .. it really helps ..
>
> Regards,
> Kazi
>
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Saifi Khan <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 19 May 2009, Yakoob, M. Kazi M. wrote:
>>
>> > replying your first email ... SAR for system activity report.
>> >
>> > not to your detailed reply in your second email.
>> >
>> > The result you sent me is my expected result too; but what i think this
>> > command give a different output in Ubuntu.
>> >
>> > I updated the system and still the output is same.
>> >
>> > now; i need to know how manually can i calculate %util ...
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance ...
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Kazi
>> >
>>
>> On my Gentoo machine, i just extracted the source code of
>> sysstat 8.0.4
>>
>> Here is an excerpt from the FAQ
>>
>> Because of a Linux kernel bug, iostat -x may display huge I/O
>> response times (svctm) and a bandwidth utilization (%util) of
>> 100% for some devices.
>>
>> Indeed these devices have a value for the field #9 (beginning
>> after the device name) in /proc/{partitions,diskstats} which
>> is always different from 0, and even negative sometimes.
>>
>> Yet this field should go to zero, since it gives the
>> number of I/Os currently in progress (it is incremented as
>> requests are submitted, and decremented as they finish).
>>
>> To (temporarily) solve the problem, you should reboot your
>> system to reset the counters in /proc/{partitions,diskstats}.
>>
>> working with this macro,
>> #define S_VALUE(m,n,p) (((double) ((n) - (m))) / (p) * HZ)
>>
>> please see the Twincling pastebin for the relevant code,
>> i've highlighted it for you at
>> http://twincling.pastebin.com/f67d42ace
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> thanks
>> Saifi.
>>  
>>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to