Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 It is already done. (the Hz). Well thanks very much for these information (you and other people on this thread). I believe what you say but I believe too what I see with my own eyes. If we will ever meet on a Gentoo conference or anything, I'll show my faster X11 with negative nice level. ;) Anyway I'm running it with default nice level (0) for some days because X11 is very unstable with -15 niceness. 2008/5/15 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). Please don't top post in this forum. Look, you are talking about running the X session as root. That doesn't make sense as an X session is e.g. gnome or kde which runs as the user. I fail to see how the X client programs have any effect on the the responsiveness of the server, yet this is exactly what you are saying. Then you talk about vulnerabilities in the client apps with an implication that this can somehow affect the server which runs as root. But that is just not true, except if a client can exploit a vulnerability in the server (which is to my mind not what you are saying). Finally, there is very little point in debating this topic. If Linus says that niceness has never had a whole lot of effect in Linux, and that perceived differences are entirely due to reducing the latency a specific app experiences, then I am going to go with the one guy that knows the subject and consider your experiences to be anecdotal. You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 2008/5/14 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. I think you don't know how X runs. X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Thursday 15 May 2008, Mick wrote: You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 Now, this I have noticed making a difference. Not all schedulers are born the same. I have found that (the current version of) CFQ is better than others. As a matter of interest, I remember reading somewhere that squeezing 1000Hz out of an old machine may have the opposite effect to that intended. Is this pub talk, or have you experienced something that confirms this? No, it's not just pub talk. The trick is to look closely at what is happening and why. The HZ value indicates how often the kernel should tick, which is a timing signal. The tick consumes resources of course, but has the benefit of accurate timing signals. Modern machines can cope with this nicely, they are fast enough. Older machines, in combination with the kind of software we run these days, can't cope with this amount of activity, and the whole system slows down. The problem is very dynamic and subject to many variables so there is no single one-shot solution. The answer to what to do very much starts with It depends This is why Con first started working on process schedulers, looking for an algorithm the kernel could use to adapt to these cases and still be responsive on the desktop. The man with the numbers to back it all up is Ingo Molnar. You can read the lkml archives from a few months back when CFQ was going through heavy development to get an idea of how tricky this can really get -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Thursday 15 May 2008, Mick wrote: As a matter of interest, I remember reading somewhere that squeezing 1000Hz out of an old machine may have the opposite effect to that intended. Is this pub talk, or have you experienced something that confirms this? No, it's not just pub talk. The trick is to look closely at what is happening and why. Sorry, got my names mixed up in the last post. I mentioned CFQ. Of course, I meant CFS -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
Thanks, these are already okay. 2008/5/14 Justin Findlay [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On AD 2008 May 13 Tuesday 09:50:24 PM +0200, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Before trying this, there are some kernel modifications you can try: preemptible kernel timer frequency - 1000 Hz Justin -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). Please don't top post in this forum. Look, you are talking about running the X session as root. That doesn't make sense as an X session is e.g. gnome or kde which runs as the user. I fail to see how the X client programs have any effect on the the responsiveness of the server, yet this is exactly what you are saying. Then you talk about vulnerabilities in the client apps with an implication that this can somehow affect the server which runs as root. But that is just not true, except if a client can exploit a vulnerability in the server (which is to my mind not what you are saying). Finally, there is very little point in debating this topic. If Linus says that niceness has never had a whole lot of effect in Linux, and that perceived differences are entirely due to reducing the latency a specific app experiences, then I am going to go with the one guy that knows the subject and consider your experiences to be anecdotal. You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 2008/5/14 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. I think you don't know how X runs. X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). 2008/5/14 Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. I think you don't know how X runs. X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
You really don't know what I was talking about. (sorry for my bad English). I'm NOT running my X11 session as root (only X server), but as normal user. Setting the nice level of X server below 0 (for example -10 or -15) made all X11 clients (the graphical programs) response faster. Everything responses smoother. This is not about RUNNING faster, but along with my preemptible kernel my whole X11 session become smoother. (this is important for me because I own a very slow computer..sh*t sempron processor..). Not ages ago (sarge or sid in 2006 for example) Debian asked me if I want X server to run with higher priority. (when installing x11 package with debconf set to low). This gave me the idea. My X11 session works good. There was 2 system hangups while playing video with Mplayer. Maybe that was because of the very high priority. I will play with the values, -15 proved to be dangerous. 2008/5/14 Josh Cepek [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Well I did a little Google'ing, and i found a blog. There the author wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. You don't want any vulnerabilities to be potentially exploited as the root user. Take the multiple X-terminal vulnerabilities reported last week by the Gentoo security team that could allow local attackers to hijack X11 terminals of other users. The moral is don't run as root unless you actually need to (and I'd argue that you should never need to run X sessions as root.) After doing this, I ran htop and it told me that my X11 was running with -15 niceness. I experience better responsiblity under all of X11 (kde, firefox, konsole, anything). For example switching from an existing Firefox window to (for ex.) Konsole or Xchat is much faster. I have to add, I own a very slow computer, so I have to do everything to speed up my system. It is very slow even with WinXP+official drivers. If the goal is to lower the priority of other tasks the computer may be doing at the same time, perhaps setting a higher nice value for them would offer similar results. In the case of compiling, portage provides an easy way to lower the priority with the PORTAGE_NICENESS value. 2008/5/14 Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Andrey Falko wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Nice factor gives X priority, so if you are compiling something and X's priority is high, you'll be using X as if nothing was being compiled. Only if you are root. As a normal user, you can only lower the priority of a process. -- Josh
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Thursday 15 May 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. Setting the X server to -10 may make the X more responsive to client requests - theoretically that is. However, since this is a zero sum game, some other processes will be short changed. So they may (theoretically again) run slower. It could well be that your KDE session becomes slower as a result, ha! Anyway, just looking at the info page I read: === A niceness should not be confused with a scheduling priority, which lets applications determine the order in which threads are scheduled to run. Unlike a priority, a niceness is merely advice to the scheduler, which the scheduler is free to ignore. === Perhaps this is the reason why Linus has uttered his particular words of wisdom on this matter. It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). I have slow machine(s) and I tried your suggestion, but have not run any benchmarks. I cannot sense a difference. You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 Now, this I have noticed making a difference. Not all schedulers are born the same. I have found that (the current version of) CFQ is better than others. As a matter of interest, I remember reading somewhere that squeezing 1000Hz out of an old machine may have the opposite effect to that intended. Is this pub talk, or have you experienced something that confirms this? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Thu, 15 May 2008 19:45:17 +0100 Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 15 May 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Thursday 15 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: I know X runs always as root. But setting the X server process' priority to for example -10 makes graphical software response faster. Setting the X server to -10 may make the X more responsive to client requests - theoretically that is. However, since this is a zero sum game, some other processes will be short changed. So they may (theoretically again) run slower. It could well be that your KDE session becomes slower as a result, ha! Anyway, just looking at the info page I read: === A niceness should not be confused with a scheduling priority, which lets applications determine the order in which threads are scheduled to run. Unlike a priority, a niceness is merely advice to the scheduler, which the scheduler is free to ignore. === Perhaps this is the reason why Linus has uttered his particular words of wisdom on this matter. It works for me!! (no matter the system hangs sometimes :). I think you have a fast machine, try it with a very slow computer (sempron processor and radeon xpress200m+fglrx). I have slow machine(s) and I tried your suggestion, but have not run any benchmarks. I cannot sense a difference. You'll probably get better results with X by selecting a suitable process scheduler and configuring your HZ to 1000 Now, this I have noticed making a difference. Not all schedulers are born the same. I have found that (the current version of) CFQ is better than others. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. I believe you're mixing the block device I/O SCHEDULERS (CFQ, deadline, anticipatory) with the process scheduling PLOCIES (Real time, BATCH, FIFO...). While the first are used to reorder the I/O requests to optimise the head movements in HDDs, the latter define how the kernel should divide the CPU time between processes and their threads. Choosing one I/O scheduler over another may have some effect on the way the X sessions behaves, but it would be indirect. Choosing one scheduling policy over another for a given application has a direct impact on its performance. As a matter of interest, I remember reading somewhere that squeezing 1000Hz out of an old machine may have the opposite effect to that intended. Is this pub talk, or have you experienced something that confirms this? There's a logic behind this claim. The timer frequency (as I understand it) defines how many times per second a process can be interrupted (making the CPU work on something else). The higher the frequency, the smoother the experience, but at the cost of the time it takes a process to finish. Let's see what happens if for example you had a massive tar job (e.g. archiving your $HOME) and wanted to use the system as usual at the same time. Case 1 - timer freq. = 1000Hz Working with the system is (almost) as normal - fast responses, no delay in switching windows and so on. Tar finishes its job for 30min. Case 2 - timer freq. = 100Hz The system is almost unusable. Switching windows takes several (tens of) seconds, responses are extremely slow. The tar job is done after 10min. So, too many interrupts in a saturated system (or slow CPU) would make the CPU work a little on each job and start another w/o finishing anything in time. (Again, please, correct me if I'm wrong) -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Andrey Falko wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Nice factor gives X priority, so if you are compiling something and X's priority is high, you'll be using X as if nothing was being compiled. Only if you are root. As a normal user, you can only lower the priority of a process. Uwe -- Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed! -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
Well I did a little Google'ing, and i found a blog. There the author wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X After doing this, I ran htop and it told me that my X11 was running with -15 niceness. I experience better responsiblity under all of X11 (kde, firefox, konsole, anything). For example switching from an existing Firefox window to (for ex.) Konsole or Xchat is much faster. I have to add, I own a very slow computer, so I have to do everything to speed up my system. It is very slow even with WinXP+official drivers. 2008/5/14 Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Andrey Falko wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Nice factor gives X priority, so if you are compiling something and X's priority is high, you'll be using X as if nothing was being compiled. Only if you are root. As a normal user, you can only lower the priority of a process. Uwe -- Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed! -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Well I did a little Google'ing, and i found a blog. There the author wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. You don't want any vulnerabilities to be potentially exploited as the root user. Take the multiple X-terminal vulnerabilities reported last week by the Gentoo security team that could allow local attackers to hijack X11 terminals of other users. The moral is don't run as root unless you actually need to (and I'd argue that you should never need to run X sessions as root.) After doing this, I ran htop and it told me that my X11 was running with -15 niceness. I experience better responsiblity under all of X11 (kde, firefox, konsole, anything). For example switching from an existing Firefox window to (for ex.) Konsole or Xchat is much faster. I have to add, I own a very slow computer, so I have to do everything to speed up my system. It is very slow even with WinXP+official drivers. If the goal is to lower the priority of other tasks the computer may be doing at the same time, perhaps setting a higher nice value for them would offer similar results. In the case of compiling, portage provides an easy way to lower the priority with the PORTAGE_NICENESS value. 2008/5/14 Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Andrey Falko wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Nice factor gives X priority, so if you are compiling something and X's priority is high, you'll be using X as if nothing was being compiled. Only if you are root. As a normal user, you can only lower the priority of a process. -- Josh signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Wednesday 14 May 2008, Josh Cepek wrote: lapitopi gyuszk # snice -15 X As already pointed out, running process with a nice value less than 0 can only be done by root, and it's usually a really bad idea to run your entire X session as root. X (and applications running under X) involve a lot of code, and vulnerabilities can exist in this code. I think you don't know how X runs. X *always* runs as root on Linux so whether you nice it to 19 or -19 is not relevant. It was only very very recently that someone got X to run as a user. Do you disagree or should I elaborate? -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On AD 2008 May 13 Tuesday 09:50:24 PM +0200, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Before trying this, there are some kernel modifications you can try: preemptible kernel timer frequency - 1000 Hz Justin -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Thanks in advance
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 21:50 +0200, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). I forget, but I tried it a while back and didn't see positive results. In my experience Linux already does a pretty good job with scheduling and usually when I try to out-smart it I have performance issues. -a -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Uwe -- Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed! -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Abraham Gyorgy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Thanks in advance If you run startx, I think you can do something like nice 5 startx see man page for the correct command. If you use kdm, then you can change the init script the use nice.this way is probably not the easiest and fail-safe methods. Let see if any one knows if there is a config setting for this somewhere. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Uwe Thiem [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Nice factor gives X priority, so if you are compiling something and X's priority is high, you'll be using X as if nothing was being compiled. Uwe -- Ignorance killed the cat, sir, curiosity was framed! -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Uwe Thiem wrote: On Tuesday 13 May 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Nice factor for X makes graphical software run fater? I don't thinl so. Not at all. Linus agrees with you. Linus is usually right. There was a long drawn out thread on lkml a while back about this in regard to process schedulers and this dodge/hack kept coming up. Linus' point was that it does very little, upsets the kernel's view of how to schedule jobs and he had numbers to back it up. Most interesting was his assertion that niceness usually has very little effect on Linux anyway - most differences noted are placebo effects - and niceness comes from the days 30 years ago when Unix kernels were not smart about scheduling. And niceness was only ever a kernel hint anyway. I haven't seen any patches that might affect this since so I reckon it still produces precious little effect. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Dienstag, 13. Mai 2008, Abraham Gyorgy wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). which is how many years ago? really, with a recent kernelX you more likely HURT performance than increase is. Nice -10 was good maybe 10 years ago. That debian used it a bit longer is just a sign for the typical debian inertia. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:33 PM, Daniel Iliev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:50:24 +0200 Abraham Gyorgy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Thanks in advance If I wanted to change the niceness of X, I'd do something like echo 'sleep 10 renice -n -10 `pidof X`' /etc/conf.d/local.start P.S. I don't know if giving X a different nice level would bring any effect. That would only give X higher niceness, not the apps the run under it, so you won't see much benefit. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, 13 May 2008 21:50:24 +0200 Abraham Gyorgy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Thanks in advance If I wanted to change the niceness of X, I'd do something like echo 'sleep 10 renice -n -10 `pidof X`' /etc/conf.d/local.start P.S. I don't know if giving X a different nice level would bring any effect. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Nice level for X11
On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:42:39 -0400 Andrey Falko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello guys, in which configuration file can I set a nice level for X11? (this makes all graphical software run much faster, at least when I used Debian). Thanks in advance If I wanted to change the niceness of X, I'd do something like echo 'sleep 10 renice -n -10 `pidof X`' /etc/conf.d/local.start That would only give X higher niceness, not the apps the run under it, so you won't see much benefit. If I got it right, the OP asked how to give a different niceness ONLY to his X server. After all the apps might be running on a remote machine. Hence my reply. -- Best regards, Daniel -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
