Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 07:37:42 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, davidxu@freebsd.org, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Remko Lodder <remko@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r219003 - head/usr.bin/nice Message-ID: <201102250737.43182.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <F83465F5-A56B-461D-A9E6-52CB38A4FA25@elvandar.org> References: <201102241613.p1OGDXpM047076@svn.freebsd.org> <20110225070237.F983@besplex.bde.org> <F83465F5-A56B-461D-A9E6-52CB38A4FA25@elvandar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, February 25, 2011 5:23:04 am Remko Lodder wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2011, at 10:47 PM, Bruce Evans wrote: > > > On Thu, 24 Feb 2011, John Baldwin wrote: > > > >> On Thursday, February 24, 2011 2:03:33 pm Remko Lodder wrote: > >>> > > [contex restored: > > +A priority of 19 or 20 will prevent a process from taking any cycles from > > +others at nice 0 or better.] > > > [strip information overload]. > > So, what is the consensus instead of overwelming me with too much information? Take that sentence out. It is not accurate for our schedulers. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201102250737.43182.jhb>