[Xastir-Dev] Re: Re: CPU still too busy for the wrong reasons

[Gerry Creager N5JXS]

I also get better (linux) performance with nexttime = 2... I had better 
performance than the default (1) even at nexttime = 5, but '2' is a 
better (subjective) setting.

Curt Mills, WE7U wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Tom Russo wrote:
> 
> 
>>You hit the nail on the head.
>>
>>At nexttime = 2 all is well.  On my 700MHz PIII laptop xastir hovers around
>>0.1% most of the time, on the 300MHz PII desktop it seems to like being around
>>1-2%.
>>
>>At nexttime = 1 it eats 90-97% on either machine.
> 
> 
> Ouch!
> 
> I wonder if that should be reported to the FreeBSD guys?
> 
> It'd be cool is someone could test that with Linux and FreeBSD (and
> others?) on the same hardware, but I doubt there are many people
> running multi-boot Linux/BSD systems.  You're usually running one or
> the other, kind'a like Vi/Emacs (and we all know which one is best,
> don't we?).
> 

-- 
Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager at tamu.edu
Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843