Priority numbering

[dagraham]

On the chalk board, priorities went from

• someday
• low
• medium
• high
• urgent

at one time, to replacing the names with integers because is seemed more convenient to enter "@p 3", for example, than "@p medium". The current version has the lowest priority which was represented by "someday", represented now by "1" and the highest which was "urgent", now by "5". But this from a google search:

"In software development, differentiating between P0, P1, P2, P3, and P4 levels of priority is like setting up a hierarchy for your tasks." The article goes on to establish the hierarchy:

• PO: critical
• P1: high
• P2: moderate
• P3: low
• P4: negligible

Makes me think I got this backwards and that the numerical priorities should rank from 1 highest to 5 lowest. Opinions please - 1 highest or 1 lowest?

[ib-bsb-br]

https://ib.bsb.br/prioritylist/

[gour]

Makes me think I got this backwards and that the numerical priorities should rank from 1 highest to 5 lowest. Opinions please - 1 highest or 1 lowest?

Highest!

$man nice

NICE(1)                            User Commands                            NICE(1)

NAME
       nice - run a program with modified scheduling priority

SYNOPSIS
       nice [OPTION] [COMMAND [ARG]...]

DESCRIPTION
       Run  COMMAND  with  an  adjusted niceness, which affects process scheduling.
       With no COMMAND, print the current niceness.  Niceness values range from -20
       (most favorable to the process) to 19 (least favorable to the process).
...