PDA

View Full Version : Mac OS X: Why does perl (Slim Server) use 65% of the CPU?



Mike Morper
2004-08-09, 23:30
I just upgraded to 10.3.5 tonight, and am experiencing some strange stuff
(Finder hangs, etc). During troubleshooting, I went into the Activity
Monitor and was surprised to see perl taking up 65% of my CPU. As soon as I
kill the Slim Server via the Preference pane, no more perl and I get 65% of
my CPU back. Sure, it does throttle a bit, but at any point in time it is my
CPU intensive process.

Do the other OS X users experience this? Slim Devices folks reading: Is this
what you see too in your testing? What can be done/what are you doing to
reduce it. Wholly smokes.

Thanks... Now back to my troubleshooting...

Noha Shawki and Julian Westerhout
2004-08-10, 10:21
I am on 10.3.5 on an AGP G4 upgraded to 1.24 ghz w/ an OWC card, and I have
no problems with perl using lots of CPU. With the server running but the
Squeezebox off I am at 0%, with both Squeezebox and Softsqeeze running it
goes up -- in my brief watching it went to about 40% for a bit while I was
navigating from playlist to playlist and through songs.

Just a data point, not necessarily conclusive.

Did you set Slimserver to not autostart and turn it off before installing
the 10.3.5 upgrade? I've had difficulties after prior upgrades and in
cloning a HD if I leave Slimserver running and set to start on bootup.

Best of luck,

Julian.


On 8/10/04 1:30 AM, in article BD3DB995.63AE%mike (AT) morper (DOT) net, "Mike Morper"
<mike (AT) morper (DOT) net> wrote:

> I just upgraded to 10.3.5 tonight, and am experiencing some strange stuff
> (Finder hangs, etc). During troubleshooting, I went into the Activity
> Monitor and was surprised to see perl taking up 65% of my CPU. As soon as I
> kill the Slim Server via the Preference pane, no more perl and I get 65% of
> my CPU back. Sure, it does throttle a bit, but at any point in time it is my
> CPU intensive process.
>
> Do the other OS X users experience this? Slim Devices folks reading: Is this
> what you see too in your testing? What can be done/what are you doing to
> reduce it. Wholly smokes.
>
> Thanks... Now back to my troubleshooting...
>