Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Recover from a runaway netstat process' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: geohar on Aug 23, '04 01:26:21PM

is it possible that it's menumeters itself that's spawning netstat?



[ Reply to This | # ]
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: TvE on Aug 23, '04 01:35:02PM

I guess so - but sofar I haven't had any problems with MM



[ Reply to This | # ]
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: gourls on Aug 23, '04 02:14:56PM

That is kind of weird that a CPU would just do that. Ok, it's REALLY weird. I have never heard of anything like that. Sounds like it's going to be all right.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: susfour on Aug 23, '04 02:31:19PM

I have a classic app (quickbooks) that maxes the CPU every time it's run. I've never been able to determine why or cause it to stop. Quitting the app makes cpu usage go back to normal.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: randalla on Aug 23, '04 03:48:38PM

Many Classic apps do this just by how they were written. I have the same issue with FileMaker Pro 4 when run under Classic.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Recover from a runaway netstat process
Authored by: geohar on Aug 23, '04 04:02:32PM

Classic Apps that do this are written with a polling event model which rapidly checks if any event from the OS is pending, and sits there in a tight loop checking until such an event occurs. Unfortunately, the tight loop is pretty efficient for the CPU to execute and therefore consumes a high percentage of the CPU.

Modern even models on Mac OS work in such a way that the OS will not schedule the app until there is an event pending, and they therefore don't take CPU doing so. Additionally, they can be paged out totally until an event occurs.



[ Reply to This | # ]