[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Angus Jordan <angus dot jordan at gmail dot com>
 To:  Manuel Kasper <mk at neon1 dot net>
 Cc:  jesse at wingnet dot net, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Re: known issues with 1.2b3
 Date:  Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:02:10 -0800
Personally, I couldn't care less what the CPU utilization is on my firewall.

But if this is such an issue for some people, why not use a similar
method that the interface usage graph is using?

Just my 2 cents...

Angus


On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 23:26:57 +0100, Manuel Kasper <mk at neon1 dot net> wrote:
> On 04.02.2005 11:21 -0500, Jesse Guardiani wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I've seen just the opposite. Lots of CPU utilization
> > on the first click, and very little on subsequent clicks.
> >
> > Where is this CPU utilization info being pulled from? Can someone
> > describe the algorithm?
> 
> The CPU load is sampled at the very moment you load index.php.
> Unfortunately there's no way to get the current CPU load in figures
> that are meaningful to most users (i.e. percent) without sampling the
> CPU tick counters, waiting for a second and then sampling again.
> That's also the way top(1) does it.
> 
> Even more unfortunately though, since most browsers also try to
> reload the images and CSS when you refresh the page, on slower
> platforms you get 100% CPU the moment the CPU load is sampled.
> 
> I haven't been able to come up with a better solution for this yet.
> We could run a daemon to keep track of the CPU %, but wasting an
> entire process for this would be a bit of an overkill.
> 
> - Manuel
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> 
>