Jeff,
It would not be wise to raise your process lower than 150... Although, it can be done, why would you want your process to have higher priority than system processes.
One thing people have overlooked is how many CPU's does your system have?
If you only have one processor, than putting a job in the C linear queue, could starve the rest of the system resources, including you own session.
If you have multiple CPU's, then raising the priority (lowering the queue), would in effect give the process (lock the process) to one processor, and can be much safer.
BTW, you may want to consider :ALTPROC JOB=#J###;PRI=CM;TREE
-Craig
Jeff Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
So, if I gave it a PIN Spec = 101, it would put me at the top of
non-system processes?
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnson, Tracy [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 2:52 PM
To: Jeff Cox; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: [HP3000-L] On Topic - Use of ALTPROC Command
Not to worry about system processes. They run in a much better queue,
from 1 to 100.
The other batch jobs will fight over the same queue number. Any process
with a queue greater than 150 will be starved.
UNLESS 150 falls in the same range as your 'C' queue. Then it should
drop to 'about' 200. presuming your 'C' queue is set to decay by
default.
THEN the batch jobs will fight over the bottom of the 'C' queue instead
of the top.
D and E queues will be starved.
Tracy Johnson
Measurement Specialties, Inc.
BT
NNNN
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeff Cox
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 2:23 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] On Topic - Use of ALTPROC Command
>
>
> So if I were to use this on a series of 16 batch jobs, where one kicks
> off the next, etc., should I be concerned about other processes on the
> system at that time (i.e. - system processes, other batch jobs) and
> their timely completion? I am most concerned about the possibility of
> crashing due to using this in each of the jobs.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johnson, Tracy [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 2:07 PM
> To: Jeff Cox; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: [HP3000-L] On Topic - Use of ALTPROC Command
>
> Not the highest queue. But in effect will get you pretty much what
> you asked for.
>
>
>
> Tracy Johnson
> Measurement Specialties, Inc.
>
> BT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> NNNN
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> > Behalf Of Jeff Cox
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 2:00 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [HP3000-L] On Topic - Use of ALTPROC Command
> >
> >
> > I have seen the use of the following command and am unsure
> of exactly
> > what it is doing: ALTPROC 0;PRI=150
> >
> > Does this put the job that uses it into the highest queue for
> > processing?
> >
> > Jeff Cox
> > Manager, Catalog Applications Systems Office 678-533-2811 Cellular
> > 770-335-3142
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
> > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> > * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> >
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
---------------------------------
All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
