Once upon a time, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(a)wolff.to> said:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 10:57:21 -0600,
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com> said:
> >
> > PRIORITY=-19
> Why do you (repeatedly) call it "insane"? That's kind of rude. The
> process is running at a low priority level; do you have a problem with
> that?
Aren't negative priorities higher? I think this is running at the max
priority, not the min one.
Negative priorities are higher, but that's not what is being set. For
historical compatibilty, "nice" takes a numeric option as a nice value,
so "nice -n X" is the same as "nice -X" (it appears this behavior is
not
documented). You can verify this:
$ nice -n 19 ps -o nice,cmd
NI CMD
19 ps -o nice,cmd
$ nice -19 ps -o nice,cmd
NI CMD
19 ps -o nice,cmd
--
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.