rcj@burl.UUCP (R. Curtis Jackson) (05/30/85)
Just curious to know the largest runques observed on Vaxen. I am running on several different Vax 11/780s all running SVR2. One machine always has the largest runques; I take samples via 'sar -q 3 20'; it takes an average every 3 seconds for a minute (20 times) and gives an average figure. The worst I had seen before this machine was an average of 17. Yesterday I did one of these and the average was 40.3, with a high runque of 46.8!!! Anyone seen anything worse than this? -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj
guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) (06/01/85)
> Just curious to know the largest runques observed on Vaxen. I am running > on several different Vax 11/780s all running SVR2. One machine always > has the largest runques; I take samples via 'sar -q 3 20'; it takes an > average every 3 seconds for a minute (20 times) and gives an average > figure. The worst I had seen before this machine was an average of 17. For the benefit of BSD people, "runque" ~= "instantaneous load average". S5R2 keeps two counters; one for the number of loaded processes on the run queue and one for the number of swapped processes on the run queue. The 4.2BSD "load average" also includes sleeped or stopped processes sleeping at a "nonpositive" priority (<= PZERO). The "total" fields "t_rq" and "t_sq" correspond to the "runque" and "swpque" values. Guy Harris
kre@munnari.OZ (Robert Elz) (06/01/85)
In article <716@burl.UUCP>, rcj@burl.UUCP (R. Curtis Jackson) writes: > Just curious to know the largest runques observed on Vaxen... > > Yesterday I did one of these and the average was 40.3, with a high > runque of 46.8!!! > > Anyone seen anything worse than this? 3:36pm up 2:09, 37 users, load average: 108.53, 104.78, 98.49 That's output from 4.1 something's uptime (I forget which version we were running then, it might even have been very early 4.2), in late October 83. As you can see (if you understand the format) the load was still rising. It peaked at something over 110... This is from munnari, a 780 with 4Mb, fpa, etc (but not "set clock fast") The system had only been up 2 hours, as just before then the load was SO bad that we had to reboot to get things back into a stable state. Robert Elz seismo!munnari!kre (ps: in case you're wondering, most of those users would have been running ingres - there would also have been a bunch of f77 compiling)
muller@sdcc3.UUCP (Keith Muller) (06/04/85)
I wish I had saved the line, but in Feb 1983 sdcc3 running 4.1c(?) had a load of over 125. (Sdcc3 is a 780 with 4 megs 64 ports, ethernet and had about 2500 active student users). The machine made the local TV news that week as students were camping out in the terminal rooms with tents waiting for a terminal port. This load probably went a lot higher, but it took 50 minutes for that uptime to respond and it was 3am in the morning and I wasn't going to try another one. I know if I turned off the load control system the runq would easily top 125 on any one of the student machines here (it is the last week of the quarter here). Keith Muller University of California
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (06/05/85)
> This load probably went a lot higher, but it took 50 minutes for > that uptime to respond and it was 3am in the morning and I wasn't > going to try another one. Another argument for control-T! :-) load 3.52 3.27 3.37, pid 13179, %cpu 1.27, 28k of 117k, kbd wait (Or if you prefer: after ``stty -load5 -load15 uptime children'' up 12h 49m, load 3.52, pid 13179 children 1, %cpu 0.68, 28k of 117k kbd wait or I could turn off pid or size or whatever.) -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 4251) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@maryland
kay@warwick.UUCP (Kay Dekker) (06/07/85)
In article <2898@sdcc3.UUCP> muller@sdcc3.UUCP (Keith Muller) writes: >The machine made the local TV news >that week as students were camping out in the terminal rooms with tents >waiting for a terminal port. Camping out in the terminal rooms with *tents*? Why (he asked, surprised) do you need a tent to camp in a terminal room? Or is the weather kind enough in California to permit you to have open-roofed terminal rooms? Kay. -- "In a world without rational structure, even the most bizarre events must eventually take place." -- Philip Avalon, "On the Resurrection of Reagan" ... mcvax!ukc!warwick!flame!kay
mjl@ritcv.UUCP (06/09/85)
In article <6299@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >> This load probably went a lot higher, but it took 50 minutes for >> that uptime to respond and it was 3am in the morning and I wasn't >> going to try another one. > >Another argument for control-T! :-) Control-T is nice, but when the load average is 125, it's just quicker at telling you how miserable things really are :-( -- Mike Lutz Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY UUCP: {allegra,seismo}!rochester!ritcv!mjl CSNET: mjl%rit@csnet-relay.ARPA