Re: Setting priority for exe built in DFf6.6

From: Antti K (sikanautaa_at_spam.fi)
Date: 05/28/04

  • Next message: Gerry Thomas: "Intel Software for Tortran"
    Date: Fri, 28 May 2004 09:06:37 +0300
    
    

    Stig Kildegård Andersen wrote:
    >>Anyway I got help by using sleepqq(). Just setting the priority in
    >>the starting of application does not seem to be enough (start/low ...).
    >>Somehow calculation needs to have frequently call sleepqq(0):s or
    >>call sleepqq(1):s to check is there other processes needing part
    >>it's cpu-use. I noticed when using these sleepqq:s total cpu-need
    >>was reduced from 29 s to 4 seconds; strange. Total time needed for
    >>the calculation was changed from 30 s to 35 s.
    >
    >
    >
    > It is odd, I think, that lowering the priority of the process is not enough.
    > In my experience using the code I posted above is sufficient. I use it when
    > I run run parallel programs on a network of non-dedicated machines and I
    > have not yet received a single complaint about my programs not yielding the
    > CPU to other programs. Windows appears very efficient at excutig higher
    > priority threads before lower prioriy ones. Does your application use
    > multiple threads so that some might remain at high priority or do you use
    > library routines that can sit on the CPU while waiting for a response from
    > the network, or similar?
    >
    > Kind Regards,
    > Stig Kildegård
    >
    >
    The application does not use multiple threads nor it uses any library
    routines 'sitting on the CPU'. Task manager shows that the process
    has 'low'-priority. Hard to say why Windows gives too much of the CPU
    for it.

    Best regards

    Antti


  • Next message: Gerry Thomas: "Intel Software for Tortran"