SCHED_ULE and nice still ignored

[Harald Schmalzbauer]

On Saturday 31 January 2004 22:53, Tom wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Harald Schmalzbauer wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > If I start a process with nice 15 (like seti) it shouldn't slow down my
> > machine by exponetial factors.
> > It should take cycles which are almost unused and not block regular
> > processes (like make)
>
> ...
>
>   Isn't "idprio" the best way of scheduling a process to run when the
> system is otherwise idle?  Can you try with idprio?

I didn't know that.

Thank you for that hint, I'll have a look at it.
But I think SCHED_ULE shouldn't behave that different to 4BSD ragrding nice.

Thanks,

-Harry

>
>   From what I know of "nice", it should reduces the processes scheduling
> priority.  There is no definition in the nice manpage on the exact
> definition of reduced priority means.
>
> Tom
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20040131/804b4491/attachment-0001.bin