From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <s.lendl@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BC8C96446
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:24:17 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 14D4216044
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:23:47 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:23:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CBED747FEC;
Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:23:45 +0100 (CET)
From: Stefan Lendl <s.lendl@proxmox.com>
To: Roland <devzero@web.de>
Cc: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Thomas
Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <813667cc-81b6-46db-b144-54ee4cc578f6@web.de>
References: <20240125105658.1541023-2-s.lendl@proxmox.com>
<813667cc-81b6-46db-b144-54ee4cc578f6@web.de>
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 16:23:45 +0100
Message-ID: <87jzmn8fb2.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.032 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH ksm-control-daemon] ksmtuned: fix large
number processing
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Feb 2024 15:24:17 -0000
Roland <devzero@web.de> writes:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> looks good for me so far and indeed, on very large system when VMs eat
> up >2TB this could hit the limit very soon.
>
> but shouldn't we add some newline , as the original "print sum" prints on=
e ?
>
> root@s740:/usr/sbin# seq 1 100000 | awk '{ sum +=3D $1 }; END { print sum=
}'
> 5.00005e+09
> root@s740:/usr/sbin# seq 1 100000 | awk '{ sum +=3D $1 }; END { printf
> ("%.0f", sum) }'
> 5000050000root@s740:/usr/sbin#
>
> # seq 1 100000 | awk '{ sum +=3D $1 }; END { print sum }'|xxd
> 00000000: 352e 3030 3030 3565 2b30 390a=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 5.00005e+09.
>
> # seq 1 100000 | awk '{ sum +=3D $1 }; END { printf ("%.0f", sum) }' |xxd
> 00000000: 3530 3030 3035 3030 3030=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 5000050000
>
> # seq 1 100000 | awk '{ sum +=3D $1 }; END { printf ("%.0f\n", sum) }' |x=
xd
> 00000000: 3530 3030 3035 3030 3030 0a=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 5000050000.
>
I see that this appears different in that way.
In the script the result is always assigned to a variable which should
not care about a newline, or should even better be without the newline
in my opinion.