Hi All,

There is D3 7.2.1 on RH 7.2. NICE parameter in the pick0 file is set to 0.
D3 runs basic programs (they may be same or different) on several phantoms
talking to serial devices.

I'm watching Linux 'top' command to audit performance and resource
consumption. I notice that foregreground processes have NICE=0, while
phantom ones have NICE=4, which are of lower priority AFAIK.

Is there any way to uplift phantom process priority (NICE) in any way,
groupwise or individually? Is there possible to set NICE=-19 (highest) up
for phantoms?

Could anybody shed some light over that?

TIA
Nick

"Nikolai Lukin" wrote:

You may be looking for the commands "set-batch" and "set-batchdly"
which affect how processes priorities are modified. The "d3" command
from *nix also has a "-i" argument to set the nice value on a per-port
basis. I'm guessing that when D3 starts up phantoms it might default
this value to "4" - I haven't looked at this stuff in years, sorry.

HTH
T

Tony,

Thank you for your information. Within last two days I've read through D3
RefMan and found all that you're talking about. I set up appropriate
processes accordingly and now take time to watch results.

In fact phantoms get NICE value 4 points lower than is set in pick0 (for
flusher). In other words if nice= -10 in pick0, then it equals to -6 for
phantoms.

Nick

"Tony Gravagno" <g6q3x9lu53001 (AT) sneakemail (DOT) com.invalid> wrote

Nikolai wrote:
Wow. Good stuff to know. Thank you for posting that Tony and Nick!

BTW (you may know this already) but while running top you can hit the
'r' key and it will prompt you for a PID to renice. You could also use
the 'renice' command. You'll have to be logged in as root to change
other users processes.

Looks like you've got it figured out different way so this may not do
much for you but it may come in handy in the future.

Tedd,

Thanks for this info, which maybe useful as well. In this deal I'm a bit
lazy to dig up more in Linux man, etc., so that would thankfully chew what
others digested already

The problem with the site is that I needed to arrange some sort of
guaranteed "quick" response for a cash register operator.
After some tuning made it looks now like registers' response got lots more
stable.

Nick

"Tedd" <tedd_scofield (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote