[KLUG Members] X server & nice settings

[members@kalamazoolinux.org]

>I'm running 2.4.19 with the pre-emptive kernel patches. Recently, I
>looked at a ps(1) listing and remembered that my X server runs at 'nice
>-10', which, on the nice scale of -20 to 20, with 0 being neutral, is,
>ah, pretty mean. ;-)

That is pretty mean.

>I set it to 0 and cranked up X 4.1.0/KDE 2.2.2. I can't see any
>difference. Is X normally run at -10 to avoid acute memory/CPU crunches,
>or is it done to prevent chronic widget-drawing lag?

What distro are you using.  My RH72 wokstation doesn't nice X.  I reniced X to
-10 and now widget painting is very herky-jerky and it can hardly keep up with
my typing.  It is quite a noticable difference.

I'd imagine reniced X might be better at pumping out video however,  as most
video apps use extensions that can map straight to the frame buffers.

My kernel is "Linux lnx01688.morrison.iserv.net 2.4.9-13SGI_XFS_1.0.2 #1"
[root@lnx01688 adam]# rpm -q XFree86
XFree86-4.1.0-15
[root@lnx01688 adam]# rpm -q gnome-core
gnome-core-1.4.1-1.ximian.4

>(I should note that the pre-emptive patches make a HUGE difference in X
>and I wouldn't run any kernel without 'em (excepting some particular
>bug, of course). XMMS, for example, is a massive graphics drag, and its
>GUI unuable, without low-latency or kernel pre-emption.)

I've never tried the pre-emptive patches,  sounds interesting.  I'll have to
find out if they blend with my XFS kernel.

BTW,  I've seen XMMS sludge X on occasion on my workstation (X is local).  But
it doesn't seem to ever effect X on my LTSP station;  don't know if it is
because they run X seperately (basically the CPU has X and a TCP/IP stack and
not bloddy much else to worry about) or because they have an SMP