Re: systat vmstat disk widths
David Brownlee <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
systat has been updated to use the new humanize_number(), (thanks to Simon for the suggestion and Tomas Svensson for the code :) On Thu, 8 Aug 2002, Simon Burge wrote: > Other things that come to mind are auto-scaling the widths of the > columns based on the number of disk devices, and perhaps some heuristic > to weed out devices that aren't really used (cd0, fd0 and md0 in your > example). It would seem to make sense to sort the devices as used in iostat, systat, vmstat and friends. It doesn't make sense to throw away cd0 and fd0 is you have space for them, but you really ought to make sure you display raid0 before them in case you run out of space. iostat is a classic example of this. The question is where to do the sorting? On a random system here sysctl reports: hw.disknames = wd0 wd1 fd0 md0 raid1 raid2 To my mind any consumer of this information probably wants fd0 md0 after raid1 raid2 (or doesn't care), so does it make sense to sort inside the kernel? This has issues with disks being added and removed, but you have that anyway if you hook up two hotpluggable devices and then remove the first. The sort order would probably be: - md* last - fd* next to last - cd* next to fd* - Then ccd* and raid*? - For the remainder, alphabetical? -- David/absolute -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --