On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Glynn Clements <glynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > query wrote: > >> okay..Thanks for the clarification . Since the host sometimes >> continues to remain busy for around 2 hours , > > Busy to the point that ssh/sshd doesn't get *any* CPU time for 2 > hours? Either you're misunderstanding something, or that's a seriously > misconfigured server. That is my misunderstanding only .The CPU is 100% busy but it is not that all the 100% is being utilized by our process and no other process is getting the CPU time. I will calculate an optimal value by going through once more over the system during the peak CPU utilization . But I am still confused who is terminating the connection in our case and on how is calculating the timeout value. AS you mentioned in your first comment that it the kernel who is terminating the connection , but based on what it is terminating the connection . As you said earlier , Keep-alive allows us to detect that a host is unreachable (e.g. network failure, system crash, power failure, etc) , It is not going to kill sshd , Apologies for repeating the same question , but I am still confused regarding this. Thanks Zaman > > In general, processes which need a lot of CPU cycles should have a > lower priority than those which need little. The relative "importance" > of processes doesn't matter here. A system where the key process gets > 95% CPU while support processes get the other 5% is preferable to one > where the key process gets 100% CPU and support processes are > suspended for long periods. > > -- > Glynn Clements <glynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-admin" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
