| Date: | Mon, 14 May 2001 15:54:36 -0700 |
|---|
| Reply-To: | kmself@IX.NETCOM.COM |
|---|
| Sender: | "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> |
|---|
| From: | "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@IX.NETCOM.COM> |
|---|
| Subject: | Re: Unix performance question |
|---|
| In-Reply-To: | <3B005F94.827@virgin.net>; from roland.rashleigh-berry@VIRGIN.NET
on Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:43:32PM +0100 |
|---|
| Content-Type: | multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; |
|---|
on Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:43:32PM +0100, Roland (roland.rashleigh-berry@VIRGIN.NET) wrote:
> Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > > > Prioritizing jobs with nice will often fail spectacularly in producing
> > > > any reasonable results when I/O contention is a bottleneck. 'nice' is
> > > > more useful for rationalizing CPU-bound processes.
> > >
> > > According to "iostat", disk contention was not the problem.
> >
> > Post output.
>
> Are you bOrg?
No. I'm trying to help you resolve your issue. I need data to do this,
and you're the only person in a position to do this.
If you don't care for assistance, I'll attend to something else.
You're currently wasting both of our time.
--
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand? There is no K5 cabal
http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/ http://www.kuro5hin.org
[application/pgp-signature]
| 
