[H-GEN] Priorities
Robert Brockway
robert at timetraveller.org
Thu Jun 5 22:36:49 EDT 2003
[ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and ]
[ Unix-related topics. Posts from non-subscribed addresses will vanish. ]
On Thu, 6 Jun 2003, Robert Stanford wrote:
> What is the logic behind negative nice values having higher priorities
> than positive ones? At first glance it seems a bit backwards, but I'm
> sure there must be a good (and unknown to me) reason for it.
>
> In fact how come they range from -20 to +19, why not 0-39 ?
I'm reasonably sure that originally nice values were only positive and
that negative nice values were only added later. So I guess it could be
seen as historical.
I actually like this arrangement - the idea of 0 niceness being the
default sits well with me. Afterall, a positive value means you are being
nice to other users while a negative value means you are hogging the cpu
:)
Rob
--
Robert Brockway B.Sc. email: robert at timetraveller.org ICQ: 104781119
Linux counter project ID #16440 (http://counter.li.org)
"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens" -Baha'u'llah
--
* This is list (humbug) general handled by majordomo at lists.humbug.org.au .
* Postings to this list are only accepted from subscribed addresses of
* lists 'general' or 'general-post'. See http://www.humbug.org.au/
More information about the General
mailing list