[KLUG Members] X server & nice settings

[members@kalamazoolinux.org]

Bumped <Send Message> too soon....

>>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
server supplying the application gas.