Re: RFC: Sorting in top -m io

* Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav <des_at_des.no> [040708 15:24] wrote:
> Giorgos Keramidas <keramida_at_freebsd.org> writes:
> > What do you all think of this patch to top(1)?
> 
> extremely inefficient; get_io_stats() is an expensive function and you
> really don't want to call it approximately log(n) per process while
> sorting, especially when it returns the same values every time.
>
> an ugly trick to get around this is to have get_process_info() store
> io stats in ki_spare[] or some other unused kinfo_proc field, so you
> never need to call get_io_stats() outside get_process_info().

I think you could generate an array indexed by the offset into
the procs feild...  If that's not clear I may be able to whip
up a cache of that info tonight for you.  (instead of
spamming a feild in the array.)

> you should also do secondary sort orders like the existing compare_*()
> functions do, since qsort() is unstable, so processes with identical
> stats will jump around if they aren't also sorted by name or some
> other secondary criterion.

You can use mergesort, but I may be missing the point.

-- 
- Alfred Perlstein
- Research Engineering Development Inc.
- email: bright_at_mu.org cell: 408-480-4684