> There is but one problem with the setting: The cruncher itself is already set
> at Low priority in Windows. There is no Idle priority in Windows though,
> unlike in Linux for instance.
The TaskManager only shows/changes process-priority, but every process can start multiple threads.
The process-priorities in NT4 is:
low, normal, high, realtime; or 4, 8, 13, 25.
Win2k adds below/above normal at 6 & 10.
> So unless as far as I know, some people over at Microsoft program a Lower than
> Low/Higher than Idle and Idle option for applications into Windows itself,
> Idle will always be taken up by the System Idle process, while all apps will
> start at a minimum of a Low priority.
System idle process is running at priority 0.
Threads is set relative to process-priority, and these are for win2k:
low, below normal, normal, above normal, high, real-time; or
-2, -1, 0, +1, +2, +11
So a process running as normal-class can have a thread started as low, this gives effective priority 6. If you changes the process to "low" by taskmanager or similar, the thread automatically decreases to 2.
Seti@home for BOINC is using thread-priority "low" & process-class "low", so this gives priority 2.
CPDN uses thread-priority "normal" & process-class "low" for hadsm3um_4.02_w and this gives effective priority 4. This is the same as "classic" seti@home, and this is too high for some office-programs and similar.
But there are also a special "idle"-thread-priority, this sets the thread-priority to 1. In distributed computing among others UD with THINK is using this priority, and folding@home has this as default but is configurable to run at priority 1-4.
Some (badly programmed) programs can also rely on idle priority for some things, and of course if DC is using higher priority you've got a problem.
The "idle"-thread-priority doesn't follow the normal rules of being relative to the process-class-priority, and only responds then this is bumped to "real-time", then the effective priority is 16.
> BOINC itself however starts at Normal priority. You can test if it makes a
> difference by rightclicking on the BOINC_GUI (??) application and set its
> priority level down to Low as well. If all is well, both the hadsm3um_4.02_w
> and hadsm3_4.02_w applications should already be running at Low priority.
> If they aren't change them to show like that.
There's no point to change the priority of BOINC itself, since it's the applications like seti@home or CPDN that uses 99%+ of the cpu-power.
And since BOINC starts the applications with process-class-priority "low", the only you can do in TaskManager is to increase the priority, and of course this will only make things worse. ;)
Not being a programmer, don't know if there's an easy compiler-flag or something to say "thread #1" should run as "idle" & "thread #2" should run as "high".
Of course, maybe you'll have to rewrite half the code to change the thread-priority, or the compiler doesn't have this choise at all...