Xref: utzoo comp.unix.xenix:4588 comp.unix.wizards:14285
Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!ucsd!rutgers!att!cuuxb!dlm
From: dlm@cuuxb.ATT.COM (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Changing the nice() value of a running process.
Message-ID: <2398@cuuxb.ATT.COM>
Date: 21 Jan 89 19:30:16 GMT
References: <363@lilink.UUCP>
Reply-To: dlm@cuuxb.UUCP (Dennis L. Mumaugh)
Organization: ATT Data Systems Group, Lisle, Ill.
Lines: 20

In article <363@lilink.UUCP> mikej@lilink.UUCP (Michael R.
Johnston) writes: about using nice to change process priorities
and make things work.

In a job a long time ago in a place far far away ....

I set the nice value of login to be 2:  I.e. just before login
does the setuid stuff it does nice(2).

Hence the default level of all users was 2.  Then the cc system
and nroff/troff had a nice of 3 set (actually one should nice to
max(3, current nice).  And all editors had a nice of 1.  Ps ran
with a nice of -10.

The result was that interactive users got good response and
nobody suffered.  Even with the new UNIX schedulers this scheme
ought to be adopted by all.
-- 
=Dennis L. Mumaugh
 Lisle, IL       ...!{att,lll-crg}!cuuxb!dlm  OR cuuxb!dlm@arpa.att.com