Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority, couldn’t.
I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? 
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.
–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
No, it is POSIX-ism Rob 
<nospam93@parse.com> wrote in message news:9tjppk$9ms$1@inn.qnx.com…
Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority, couldn’t.
I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? >
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
Igor Kovalenko <kovalenko@home.com> wrote:
No, it is POSIX-ism Rob >
That sucks. I thought the “correct” POSIX-ism in this case would be
to limit it to the FIFO or RR “max” values.
“29” isn’t all that useful in a system that goes to 63
(But you can see where it looked at least a bit like a QNX4-ism )
Cheers,
-RK
nospam93@parse.com> > wrote in message news:9tjppk$9ms$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority, couldn’t.I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? >
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
nospam93@parse.com wrote in article <9tldn4$bqu$1@inn.qnx.com>…
Igor Kovalenko <> kovalenko@home.com> > wrote:
No, it is POSIX-ism Rob >That sucks. I thought the “correct” POSIX-ism in this case would be
to limit it to the FIFO or RR “max” values.“29” isn’t all that useful in a system that goes to 63 >
BTW, you can renice that a few times and get priority 63
Eduard.
(But you can see where it looked at least a bit like a QNX4-ism >
Cheers,
-RK
nospam93@parse.com> > wrote in message news:9tjppk$9ms$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority, couldn’t.I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? >
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
\Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
“ed1k” <ed1k@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:01c17418$9795d260$106fa8c0@ED1K…
nospam93@parse.com > wrote in article <9tldn4$bqu$> 1@inn.qnx.com> >…
Igor Kovalenko <> kovalenko@home.com> > wrote:
No, it is POSIX-ism Rob >That sucks. I thought the “correct” POSIX-ism in this case would be
to limit it to the FIFO or RR “max” values.“29” isn’t all that useful in a system that goes to 63 >
BTW, you can renice that a few times and get priority 63 >
Or you can use on -p X
Eduard.
(But you can see where it looked at least a bit like a QNX4-ism >Cheers,
-RK
nospam93@parse.com> > wrote in message news:9tjppk$9ms$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority,
couldn’t.I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? >
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at
www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
\Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
In qnx4, the “nice” utility mapped the value of “incr” to the realtime
scheduling priorities. So, if the qnx6 “nice” utility was a direct
port, it may try to do the same thing (with the qnx4 priority range).
But unix98 says that nice() cannot be used to adjust realtime scheduling
priorities (the call does nothing):
http://www.opennc.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xsh/nice.html
So, I would avoid nice() when using the posix realtime scheduling.
But qnx6 doesn’t appear to have the equivalent of the “qnx4 nice” – start
a new process with a priority with an increment/decrement from the parent’s
current priority. The “on” util takes an absolute priority, not
a priority relative to the parent’s priority.
Should nice() have the qnx4 or unix98 behaviour? If the qnx4 behaviour then
Mr “nospam93” found a bug in the qnx6 nice util, it should accept the full
qnx6 priority range
If the unix98 behaviour, then nice util doesn’t nothing. But maybe
the on util could support a relative priority adjust for the new
process.
nospam93@parse.com wrote:
Igor Kovalenko <> kovalenko@home.com> > wrote:
No, it is POSIX-ism Rob >That sucks. I thought the “correct” POSIX-ism in this case would be
to limit it to the FIFO or RR “max” values.“29” isn’t all that useful in a system that goes to 63 >
(But you can see where it looked at least a bit like a QNX4-ism >
Cheers,
-RK
nospam93@parse.com> > wrote in message news:9tjppk$9ms$> 1@inn.qnx.com> …
Just noticed this. Tried to run something at a high priority, couldn’t.I assume this is a “QNX 4”-ism in “nice” ? >
[columbia@ttyp0] nice --40 ntpd
nice: current priority is 10. The increment must be -19<=n<=9.–
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
Robert Krten, PARSE Software Devices +1 613 599 8316.
Realtime Systems Architecture, Consulting and Training at > www.parse.com
Email my initials at parse dot com.
–
Kirk Russell Bridlewood Software Testers Guild