Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am reading Operating Systems by William Stallings. I came across the line below while reading reasons for process termination,
Time Overrun:
The process has waited longer than a specified maximum for a certain event
to occur.
For example, a program wants to take input from the user so its in the blocked state. Now if the user does not provide any input in a particular time period, according to this statement the program should go to exit state. This is impractical. None of the programs seem to do so. Please guide. Thanks
The reason may be given by the book is starvation. When a process needs execution of a certain task and it cannot be performed, this situation is called starvation. So, the process is made to terminate, if it reaches the dead line.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I need to get the Processes consuming CPU the most and over what time. Is this possible using any counter or script?
This at least gets you the info on who's using up the CPU. As to when, well that's another question entiresly.
I think you should configure a data collector set in Performance Monitor (PerfMon). You can collect the counter "\Process(*)% Processor Time". You can roll over the collector files for analysis later and hence see process performance over time.
When you look at the files later the graphs should make it easier to find the process that's consuming more CPU. I can't bang out a full tutorial at the moment, but a simple google search should turn up plenty of instructional info.
I will say the biggest challenge is configuring the schedule just right to make sure you capturing all the data you need. If that starts getting confusing there's a folder buried in Task Manager called PLA. That's for Performance Logs & Alerts. You should find a job there that correlates to your collector. It may be easier to work on the schedule there...
Thanks.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I see the following ps output. What does U<s mean? How to force it running?
root 3531 0.0 0.4 4737660 34172 ?? U<s Wed09AM 189:36.15 /System/Library/CoreServices/backupd.bundle/Contents/Resources/backupd
U is uninterruptible wait
< is high priority
s is session leader
The last 2 are in common with other systems; I've never seen U before (uninterruptible wait is usually 'D' since disk I/O is a common case).
It can't be "forced" to run except by completion of whatever it's waiting for, which is not apparent from just the state.
How do you know it's not running? I imagine that a backup process is I/O bound so it will quite likely be in an I/O wait when you look at it - but that doesn't mean it's been waiting all alone; it could be flipping between waiting and running quite rapidly.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Can I make windows 7 freeze for a short period of time,
during this time I want it to perform absolutely no action.
In particular, the OS should not access to any storage device.
My original idea was to crate an interrupt, however, I think that long interrupt will cause a blue screen (which I want to prevent).
I can tell you for a fact that this is not possible - if you do this to the primary volume the machine will bluescreen because of a watchdog timer, even for a short time. If you disconnect the drive, it will immediately bluescreen. If you do this to a secondary volume, it will be surprise removed.
If you have less than a team of 10-20 very skilled NT kernel developers / testers, this idea is not even beginning to be practical. What is your scenario and what you're trying to accomplish at a high level?
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
How much time can elapse between users action and a reaction of the application to make the user feel like it was "instant" or "in an unnoticeable time span"? (Some say that 250ms, others say 100ms, whats the real number, approx?)
100ms is correct. Plus/minus something, depends on the user.
This article has a nice picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_time
As you can see, 100ms is the time, a user detects a change, but he needs longer to respond to the change.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
What is the Windows Task Manager "Handles" column a measure of? File Handles? Or Page File Pointers? Also is it bad for one program to have 8000 handles?
It's a measure of kernel handles. Kernel handles types and the functions that create them include:
File handles (CreateFile)
Memory mapped files (CreateFileMapping)
Events (CreateEvent)
Mutexes (CreateMutex)
Semaphores (CreateSemaphore)
Processes (CreateProcess)
Threads (CreateThread)
And more than I forget or have never heard of.
8000 for a single process seems incredibly excessive.
8000 for a single process does seem rather a lot, but not necessarily out of the question - it depends on the behaviour. You should think of handles as a special kind of memory - high usage is a possible warning sign, but not if it is stable. If the handle usage is stable, then it is not a sign of a leak, although you might have some optimisation to perform to get it to use fewer handles.