[mythtv-users] "Nice" recommendations

[Ian Evans]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Nick Morrott <knowledgejunkie at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 31 October 2017 at 14:36, Jan Ceuleers <jan.ceuleers at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 31/10/17 15:19, Nick Morrott wrote:
> >> On 31 October 2017 at 14:14, Ozzy Lash <ozzy.lash at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Isn't a negative nice value giving the process a HIGHER priority?  I
> think
> >>> you mean "nice 19"  correct?
> >>
> >> Correct. A lower nice value gives the process a higher priority.
> >>
> >> +ve (1 - 19): lower priority
> >> 0: default priority
> >> -ve (-1 - -20): high priority
> >
> > Although this is true you need to experiment with your implementation of
> > "nice" as to how to feed it the desired niceness value.
> >
> > Start by noting that nice without parameters returns the current
> > niceness value.
> >
> > Then experiment with different syntactic options and values:
> >
> > root at hobbiton:~# nice nice
> > 10
> > root at hobbiton:~# nice -19 nice
> > 19
> > root at hobbiton:~# nice --19 nice
> > -19
> > root at hobbiton:~# nice -n 19 nice
> > 19
> >
> > So as you can see, if you feed it a niceness value it needs to be either
> > preceded by a dash or by "-n ". If you want to specify a negative value
> > then it needs two dashes (or "-n -").
>
> My apologies. My blanket "correct" did not cover the second statement
> separately, so thanks for the extra clarification.
>
> From the GNU docs:
>
> "For compatibility nice also supports an obsolete option syntax
> -adjustment. New scripts should use -n adjustment instead."
>
> Please use `nice -n adj` (especially for scripts and hints posted to
> the wiki and mailing lists) unless it's already burned into your
> muscle memory and you are beyond hope :)
>
> Cheers,
> Nick
> __
>

Thanks to everyone for the suggestions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20171101/b17e9b50/attachment.html>