hanszorn2000:

> Unfortunately I am now lost now as to which one is correct and which
> is a typo. But what is worse is the fact that, after resetting the
> variable to the default, I am still stuck with a system where heavy
> queries get all the resources (apparently because their priority is
> (set to) high) and light queries must wait all the time. Of course I
> can make the value of the parameter smaller, but would that help?
> According to the (corrected?) description that would mean that the
> priority of active threads would be lowered sooner, so the freshly
> active threads can only benefit from their priority boost for a
> shorter period of time, resulting in a higher possibility that they
> can not be completed in time (i.e. before their priority is lowered).
>

Hans, this is getting out of ARCHITECT list scope. You may ask in
ib-support or feel free to ask me privately - pes at kisavto dot ru.