<div dir="ltr"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Scott Scriven <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ubuntu-us-co@toykeeper.net">ubuntu-us-co@toykeeper.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">* Jim Hutchinson <<a href="mailto:jim@ubuntu-rocks.org">jim@ubuntu-rocks.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> In the past, the uptime usually didn't include the time it was<br>
> sleeping so I'm not sure which is the correct behavior.<br>
<br>
</div>Uptime is the wall-clock time since the kernel booted. It<br>
includes time spent sleeping. If you want to know how much time<br>
the system has been awake or active, use /proc/stat instead. It<br>
shows the number of total and active kernel time slices, among<br>
other data. The kernel time slices aren't a particularly<br>
accurate measure of time, though.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> However, how could the load be over 9 after having just woken<br>
> up?<br>
<br>
</div>Easy; that's pretty normal. Suspending and resuming are pretty<br>
busy, active events, and they generate a load spike. And... no<br>
kernel time passes while the system is asleep. That 15-minute<br>
load average is probably 14 minutes from before the system<br>
suspended, and 1 minute from after.<br>
<br>
The load is based on waiting processes and kernel time. The<br>
value, basically, is the number of processes ready to run,<br>
averaged over time. They aren't necessarily active; they're just<br>
waiting in line for the kernel's attention, whether they want CPU<br>
time or data from the disk or whatever.</blockquote><div><br>Hi Scott. Thanks for the info. Having never seen numbers like that I was a bit worried something abnormal was going on. I know waking is going to be somewhat intensive but on my desktop even under the greatest load I've ever put on it I've never seen much above 4 so 9 seemed way out of proportion. However, I can see that it's a very short time to measure anything. Maybe I should watch it over several minutes as it should fall rapidly. Thanks again for the info.<br>
<br></div></div>-- <br>Jim (Ubuntu geek extraordinaire)<br>----<br>Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.<br>See <a href="http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html">http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html</a><br>
</div>