Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:17005 comp.sys.att:6781
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!inria!gouldfr!cetia4!chris
From: chris@cetia4.UUCP (Christian Bertin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.sys.att
Subject: Re: 6386 shutdown: I CAN'T BELIEVE at&t was really this stupid!
Summary: update does put a heavy load on the system in some cases
Message-ID: <940@cetia4.UUCP>
Date: 22 Jun 89 11:25:19 GMT
References: <483@oglvee.UUCP> <14401@bfmny0.UUCP> <12044@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Organization: Cetia, Toulon, France
Lines: 23

In article <12044@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>, jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr) writes:
  (talking about the 'update' daemon)
>
> It doesn't appear to place much load on a system to do this twice
> per minute (perhaps 2 minutes CPU per day of runtime).
> 
>     --John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)


If you have a large buffer cache (1Mb on my system) and if you do a lot of
compiles, or if you do anything that creates large temporary files, you can
waste a LOT of time sync'ing files that should never have been written out
to disk. The last time I tried to measure this, a 3 hour compile session went
down to 2:40 after I changed the sync time from 30 seconds to 2 minutes.

At the very least, 'update' should take an optionnal argument to customize the
sync intervals.

Chris
-- 
Chris Bertin	| -- CETIA -- 150, Av Marcelin Berthelot, Z.I. Toulon-Est
+33(94)212005	| 83088 Toulon Cedex, France
		| inria!cetia!chris