is anyone else runing like this

[Merlin45]

Just wondering if anyone else is running SOB like this



Priority = Normal

Taskmanager priority = realtime


Just wondering.

[IronBits]

:hiya:

[allio]

One word: WHY?

Any advantage you get would be so miniscule that it would be more than offset by the fact that your machine is now totally unusable for any other tasks...

[IronBits]

Most of my boxen are used for one thing, crunching. :crazy:

[kugano]

There's a common misconception that raising a process' priority will make it "run faster." It won't -- not even a little bit. If you think about it, any given task takes a fixed number of clock cycles to complete. It doesn't matter at all when the program gets those cycles, the number of cycles needed will still be the same. The only reason to raise the priority of a process is if it's time-critical; in this case the process is saying to the kernel "hey, when I ask for a few clock cycles, I need those cycles immediately." A long-term crunching process doesn't care if another program needs to hog the CPU for a few seconds -- it'll still get the same number of cycles, it's just that a few of those cycles got shifted back a few seconds. Overall, it'll finish at the exact same time. Consider this example, where 'x' and 'Y' indicate cycles given to two different processes. Process x needs 20 cycles to complete and Process Y needs 5.

low priority x, high priority Y:
xYYxYYxYxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

high priority x, low priority Y:
xxYxxYxxYxxYxxYxxxxxxxxxx

Moral of the story (if this makes any sense): don't change SB's priority setting (or if you do change it, change it down, not up!)

[Frodo42]

I do sometimes renice proth and P-1 with one another, that is however the only reason I see to do it and I keep them at low priorities both (P-1 becomes time-critical at times).

[kugano]

Ah, sure... when both processes run "indefinitely," or at least for a long time, then it does make sense to renice them so that they work right relative to each other.