Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!oliveb!orc!mipos3!iwarp.intel.com!news
From: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Nicer than nice!
Keywords: nice,speed,unix,sysv,priority
Message-ID: <1990Feb5.052345.2120@iwarp.intel.com>
Date: 5 Feb 90 05:23:45 GMT
References: <9400@cat.UUCP>
Sender: news@iwarp.intel.com
Reply-To: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Lines: 18
In-Reply-To: ad@cat.UUCP (Axel Dunkel)

In article <9400@cat.UUCP>, ad@cat (Axel Dunkel) writes:
| Is there a possibility to change the priority of a process more than a
| 'nice -19' would do? I would like be able to start programs in background
| that get cpu time only if there is nearly nothing 'better' to do, so that
| they don't cosume cpu time while there are other processes (apart from
| init etc. of course) running. (for UNIX Sys V, R3.2).

Nice isn't really a "priority" (the manpage lies) -- just a "hint" to
the scheduler.  There isn't anything in off-the-shelf UNIX that tags
the process as "don't run this unless nobody else is doing much of
anything."

Just another UNIX hacker,
-- 
/=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III      |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn |
\=Cute Quote: "Welcome to Portland, Oregon, home of the California Raisins!"=/