Date: Fri, 25 Jun 1999 16:10:53 -0400 From: Keith Stevenson <k.stevenson@louisville.edu> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kern/12381: Bad scheduling in FreeBSD Message-ID: <19990625161053.F20792@homer.louisville.edu> In-Reply-To: <199906251830.LAA33688@freefall.freebsd.org>; from Sheldon Hearn on Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 11:30:05AM -0700 References: <199906251830.LAA33688@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 11:30:05AM -0700, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
> Basically, you want renice 20 pid to cause the affected pid to be
> allowed as close to no CPU time as possible while there are
> compute-bound processes at nice <20 running.
Based upon my reading of the renice(8) man page, the above would seem to be the
correct behavior. From the man page:
...
fiats.) The super-user may alter the priority of any process and set the
priority to any value in the range PRIO_MIN (-20) to PRIO_MAX. Useful
priorities are: 20 (the affected processes will run only when nothing
else in the system wants to), 0 (the ``base'' scheduling priority), any-
thing negative (to make things go very fast).
This sounds to me like a priority 20 process shouldn't get any CPU unless no
other processes want CPU cycles. Am I misreading something? (Man page quote
from 3.2-STABLE)
Regards,
--Keith Stevenson--
--
Keith Stevenson
System Programmer - Data Center Services - University of Louisville
k.stevenson@louisville.edu
PGP key fingerprint = 4B 29 A8 95 A8 82 EA A2 29 CE 68 DE FC EE B6 A0
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990625161053.F20792>