Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] fork_connector: add a fork connector | From | Guillaume Thouvenin <> | Date | Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:52:19 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 07:35 -0800, Paul Jackson wrote: > Guillaume wrote: > > I ran some test using the CBUS instead of the cn_netlink_send() routine > > and the overhead is nearly 0%: > > Overhead of what? Does this include merging the data and getting it to > disk?
I test the overhead of sending the fork information to a user space application. The merge of the data is done later and it has nothing to do with the fork connector...
> Am I even asking the right question here - is it true that this data, > when collected for accounting purposes, needs to go to disk, and that > summarizing and analyzing the data is done 'off-line', perhaps hours > later? That's the way it was 25 years ago ... but perhaps the basic > data flow appropriate for accounting has changed since then.
Accounting is another problem and, as you said previously, summarizing and analyzing the data is done later.
I'm sorry but I really don't understand why you're speaking about accounting when I present results about fork connector. I agree that ELSA is using the fork connector but the fork connector has nothing to do with accounting.
Regards, Guillaume
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |