Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:46:52 +0100 (CET) From: Svein Halvor Halvorsen <svein-freebsd-questions@theloosingend.net> To: "David J. Weller-Fahy" <dave-lists-freebsd-questions@weller-fahy.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question about nice Message-ID: <20041117014040.U82191@maren.thelosingend.net> In-Reply-To: <20041116144450.GA70461@weller-fahy.com> References: <20041116144450.GA70461@weller-fahy.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[David J. Weller-Fahy, 2004-11-16]
> 1. I understand nice is useful if you need to run a program at a certain
> priority. Is nice useful when not passing a priority? If so, what is
> the difference between the following two commands (in terms of priority
> level)?
>
> nice isoqlog
> isoqlog
According to the man page nice(1)
The nice utility runs utility at an altered scheduling priority, by
incrementing its ``nice'' value by the specified increment, or a default
value of 10. The lower the nice value of a process, the higher its
scheduling priority.
If you don't specify tge priority level, then mice adds 10.
> 2. If it is useful to run nice without passing a priority, then are the
> following two commands equivalent? If not, which one would be preferred
> and why?
>
> nice sudo isoqlog
> sudo nice isoqlog
The former will run sudo nice, which in turn will make isoqlog run as
root, with the priority level inherited. The latter will make sudo run
nice as root, and in turn run isoqlog with priority 10, with the effective
user inherited.
The obvoius difference, is that you let sudo run nice without a password,
you could do "sudo nice <anyprogram>" without a password.
Cheers,
Svein Halvor
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041117014040.U82191>