Re: deschall harmful to Irix?

Lee Sheridan (
Fri, 30 May 1997 23:57:37 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 30 May 1997, Christopher Dickens wrote:

> On Fri, 30 May 1997, Jonas Schlein wrote:
> > I agree 100%...I've gotten screamed at for running this on some of our
> > IRIX 5.3 machines and was using a nice value of +20! It was still using
> > between 85%-99% of the CPU which doesn't make any sense unless I don't
> > know UNIX like I think I should.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> Duh, people! Try "man nice" You'll find that +20 nice values give the
> deschall client MORE priority over other programs. For best results, try
> -19.

nice executes command with a lower CPU scheduling priority.

If the increment argument (in the range 1-20) is given, it is used; if
not, an increment of 10 is assumed.

The invoking process (generally the user's shell) must be in the time-
sharing scheduling class. The command is executed in the time-sharing

The super-user may run commands with priority higher than normal by using
a negative increment, e.g., --10.

Duh yourself. Leave UMBC folk alone.


PGP Public key available via finger.