ioztat VS bottom

Also: https://github.com/jimsalterjrs/ioztat

It might be worth installing and firing up ioztat to see if you can identify where you're experiencing the latency issues.

Have you considered using ioztat to try to isolate the problematic bits of the workload? If you go this route, it would help to carve your home directory (or wherever you're doing the most work that hits disk) into discrete datasets--eg make ~/Pictures, ~/Videos, ~/Documents their own datasets.

See if someone asked me had I done anything with zfs after I was bragging about it, I might just link to this: https://github.com/jimsalterjrs/ioztat/blob/main/ioztat

While we're on the subject of testing ZFS scripts, I've done loads with ioztat — /r/zfs' answer to zfs iostat — and plan on releasing 2.0 soon. If you want to kick the tires on that, now is certainly the time to do it.

bottom

I'd suggest Bottom as a TUI alternative to the in-built task managers - https://github.com/ClementTsang/bottom

It works on Windows also.

If anyone is looking for a "top" like, written in Rust, might have a look at https://github.com/ClementTsang/bottom

Looks like bottom with another theme

bottom - A cross-platform graphical process/system monitor with a customizable interface and a multitude of features.

As a macOS user, it boils my brain whenever I've to type in something like ~/Library/Application Support/org.rust-lang.Cargo/config.toml. macOS users have been begging CLI tools to support XDG variables on macOS too. Setting defaults is a strong indication to the community what should be the "preferred" locations. The defaults defined in your article will invariably lead to some authors saying that if that path is good enough for cargo, then it is good enough for their tool. Even the latest draft RFC acknowledges that macOS should use XDG variables too. I've written more about this here.