Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!UC780.BITNET!BRUCE From: BRUCE@UC780.BITNET.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.os.vms Subject: BITNET mail follows Message-ID: <8706200627.AA10058@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Sat, 20-Jun-87 04:05:01 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8706200627.AA10058 Posted: Sat Jun 20 04:05:01 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jun-87 05:07:04 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 33 in a previous info-vax submission.................... 1) Will VMS schedule jobs at two priority levels "fairly" or will the lower priority jobs never get reasonable response? I know the answer depends heavily on what job mix we have, so I guess I want to know if anyone has set up their system to divide their users into two or more priority classes. (I'm running an 8500 with mostly student users, a few large SAS or MACSYMA users.) 2) Is their a way to set a process priority limit downward such that the user can't set it back? The documentation for SET PROCESS/PRIORITY and SYS$SETPRI seem to be misleading. It suggests that the user can't set the base priority higher than the existing base priority when in fact they can set it back to the former (uaf specified) value. It looks like I would have to poke around in a system data structure; does anyone know how to do it? Thanks. ...................................... on 1, interactive response will be just find on priority 3, iff (if and only if) you NEVER have a job that takes the full cpu for more then just a second or so. If one of you priority 4 users starts something up which is only CPU bound (1000! or such) then the priority 3 users will see the system halt. What VMS could use in this case is a class based scheduling system (class a gets 80 % minimum, class b gets 15 % minimum, class C gets 3% minimum, class D gets 2% minimum). Each class gets to run, but each only up to its % maximum unless there is free time. on 2 I can't help. bruce on bitnet