Asri-unix.555 net.unix-wizards utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!hpvax!sri-unix!dave@UCLA-Security Sun Jan 17 07:44:24 1982 improving terminal response I'm not sure why you consider the "front end" approach to be "messy". Each program that wants to be nice just lives in /etc/bin or somewhere. The front end lives in /bin/ and does the nice, and then execs the /etc/. So /bin/edit nices and invokes /etc/bin/edit. However, I have been considering the following change to my kernel. I think the problem with editors is that since they do their own echoing, they must be swapped in to get response. But they are big, and waiting at a positive (> PZERO) priority, so they are the first to be swapped out. Fixing the niceness doesn't help here. My proposal is to fix sched (in slp.c) to modify its computation of who gets swapped out. The modification would be something along the lines of: if the guy is waiting for a terminal, and has been asleep for less than 5 seconds, he will not be swapped. else if the guy is waiting for a terminal and has been asleep for less than 15 seconds, he will be swapped only if there is nobody else at a positive priority to get rid of (who doesn't satisfy the same condition). Comments? Dave ----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/ This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided: 1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles. 2. The following notice remains appended to each copy: The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.