Anyone got any experience of Windows System Resource Manager (WSRM)?
#3
OK, OK,....
I think I must be missing something, as I cannot get it to cap CPU usage:
[Example using BIZCRIT.EXE from the WSRM CD]
i) Create a new Process Matching Criteria
ii) ...of type "Application". Browse to where BIZCRIT.EXE lives and select it
iii) Call the new Process Matching Criteria "BIZCRIT"
iv) Create a new Resource Allocation Policy, call it "Test_Policy"
v) Add BIZCRIT to the resource list and allow it 10% CPU
vi) Set the Test_Policy to [Manage]
vii) Tell WSRM to "Start Managing"
Then, launch BIZCRIT.EXE and watch the CPU top out!!!!! It should be capped!
Arghhh!!!!
Anyone?
Nog
I think I must be missing something, as I cannot get it to cap CPU usage:
[Example using BIZCRIT.EXE from the WSRM CD]
i) Create a new Process Matching Criteria
ii) ...of type "Application". Browse to where BIZCRIT.EXE lives and select it
iii) Call the new Process Matching Criteria "BIZCRIT"
iv) Create a new Resource Allocation Policy, call it "Test_Policy"
v) Add BIZCRIT to the resource list and allow it 10% CPU
vi) Set the Test_Policy to [Manage]
vii) Tell WSRM to "Start Managing"
Then, launch BIZCRIT.EXE and watch the CPU top out!!!!! It should be capped!
Arghhh!!!!
Anyone?
Nog
#4
RTFM.
Windows System Resource Manager cannot prevent an application from using CPU bandwidth. The Windows System Resource Manager service continually monitors the CPU usage of a process. If the CPU usage of a process exceeds the target defined in the resource-allocation policy, and the process begins to consume extra CPU bandwidth, the dynamic process priority management algorithm takes effect. Windows System Resource Manager lowers or raises the priority of the process and other running processes in order to find a process that can consume the extra CPU bandwidth. This brings the CPU usage of the process back down to its target.
Typically, CPU consumption targets are more likely to be met if other running processes are able to consume CPU bandwidth. This reduces the amount of unused CPU bandwidth that is available.
There is no mechanism to ensure that the CPU usage of a process will match its target. Nor is there a way to ensure that the unused bandwidth will be consumed by other processes if re-allocation occurs.
In addition, if no other processes are able to consume the unused CPU bandwidth, there is nothing to prevent the original managed process from consuming the unused bandwidth and exceeding its target allocation. On systems with under-utilized CPU bandwidth, the actual bandwidth usage will not be close to its target values because Windows System Resource Manager cannot prevent processes from consuming the unused bandwidth.
Typically, CPU consumption targets are more likely to be met if other running processes are able to consume CPU bandwidth. This reduces the amount of unused CPU bandwidth that is available.
There is no mechanism to ensure that the CPU usage of a process will match its target. Nor is there a way to ensure that the unused bandwidth will be consumed by other processes if re-allocation occurs.
In addition, if no other processes are able to consume the unused CPU bandwidth, there is nothing to prevent the original managed process from consuming the unused bandwidth and exceeding its target allocation. On systems with under-utilized CPU bandwidth, the actual bandwidth usage will not be close to its target values because Windows System Resource Manager cannot prevent processes from consuming the unused bandwidth.
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The poliotical wing of Chip Sengravy.
Posts: 6,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
possibly a "barking up the wrong tree" moment:
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/fr.../procexp.shtml
..but I had an svchost gobbling all my CPU, I just killed the offending thread and to hell with the consequences, not seen it since, and the the puter is back to normal.
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/fr.../procexp.shtml
..but I had an svchost gobbling all my CPU, I just killed the offending thread and to hell with the consequences, not seen it since, and the the puter is back to normal.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mattybr5@MB Developments
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
12
18 November 2015 07:03 AM