[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Rick Ruggiero" <rick at scorpion dot co dot th>
 To:  <EXT dash Mike dot Bradshaw at nokia dot com>
 Cc:  "'M0n0wall'" <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] about the load averages: 2.11, 0.07, 0.05
 Date:  Thu, 8 Apr 2004 13:26:49 +0700
Totally agree with your comments Mike.

[Comments below]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: EXT dash Mike dot Bradshaw at nokia dot com 
> [mailto:EXT dash Mike dot Bradshaw at nokia dot com] 
> Sent: Thursday, 8 April 2004 12:56 PM
> To: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
> Cc: rick at scorpion dot co dot th
> Subject: RE: [m0n0wall] about the load averages: 2.11, 0.07, 0.05
> 
> 
> time for my 0.02 monetary units
> 
> > 
> > Hi Rick,
> > 
> > Rick Ruggiero wrote:
> > > It means, the following:
> > > 
> > > load averages: 2.11% (Avg. process queue last minute), 0.07% (Avg.
> > > process queue last 5 minutes), 0.05% (avg process queue last 15 
> > > minutes).
> > > 
> > > I don't have the m0n0wall running properly yet, but generally
> > > uptime is the same on all UNIX platforms.
> > 
> > I think it was previously established that the three numbers 
> > corrospond to the average percentage for the last 1, 5 and 
> 15 minutes 
> > respectivly, but I do find it somewhat illuminating that 
> these numbers 
> > are related to the process queue.
> > 
> 
> As part of my job, I install monitoring software for Windows 
> and Unix. On the things that is normally tracked on a Unix 
> machine is Load Average.
> 
> The reason I was told when starting out, was that it gives an 
> easy identification of "how hard the box is working".
> 
> The figures I work with (as a rule of thumb) are; 
> Less than 1 : Box to big (too little work to do, Personal 
> workstation not running SETI etc) 1-3 : Normal/usual 4-6 : 
> Working hard (would benefit from increasing size of machine, 
> more CPU, RAM, IO etc) 6 and above : Stop being cruel

Before I sent my last message I spent little time pondering "the
addition of memory" (avoiding process swapping).  Actually as I have not
got my m0n0wall device working yet (issues with quad net interfaces)
therefore, I haven't had much opportunity to verify whether there is a
swap partition present or not (suspect not).  If there is (and you have
a large Compact Flash card), you should only receive a slight benefit in
adding additional "real" memory.  This benefit would be in reduced
context switching, etc; hence, lower CPU load.

What is the final word on that, more memory = better performance?

BTW, Adam - Checked your website, love your firewall, very neat!  Nice
car as well.  Can't get those here in Thailand.

Kindest regards,

Rick Ruggiero
Scorpion Holding Co. Ltd.