Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!cbmvax!andy From: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.misc Subject: Re: How do we change the scheduler? (Was Re: Multitasking at home...) Message-ID: <17584@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 15 Jan 91 04:07:56 GMT References: <17210@cbmvax.commodore. <7504@sugar.hackercorp.com> <42459@ut-emx.uucp> <7511@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1991Jan14.200405 Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 33 .19816@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> Sender: Reply-To: andy@cbmvax.commodore.com (Andy Finkel) Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Keywords: In article <1991Jan14.200405.19816@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> cocoiii@hobbes.ncsu.edu (John Vestal) writes: >difference between the two, if I have a compile that (for fun) takes >all of the CPU, and a shell running. The compile is one above the >shell. On AmigaDOS, the shell gets no time, until the compile is >done. On UNIX, the shell gets a certain percentage less then the >compile. It still gets some though. This is also how OS-9 works. Even without more complex methods such as task aging, generally the negative priority shell will get some CPU time on the Amiga when the compiler needs to do I/O. This will cause a task switch as the compiler waits for the I/O to complete. So, ever time the compiler Read()s or Write()s, other processes get a shot at the CPU. andy -- andy finkel {uunet|rutgers|amiga}!cbmvax!andy Commodore-Amiga, Inc. "God was able to create the world in only seven days because there was no installed base to consider." Any expressed opinions are mine; but feel free to share. I disclaim all responsibilities, all shapes, all sizes, all colors.