From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0239_01C5A117.A6B840E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   I'm sure I have experienced every time of runaway process or hang =
that you have.  Runaway processes are extremely rare in my experience.  =
Hangs I see more often and honestly, are frequently not the due to the =
process that appears hung or you might guess.  On my of my test machines =
when some app stops responding almost always it is ituneshelper.exe or =
ipodservice.exe, a process without a visible window.   On another hangs =
are usually due to a process that throttles the number of threads it =
creates to service requests getting quickly bombarded with a large = number
of requests when there is a change in the network configuration.  = In
neither case is that app that is not responding doing anything wrong = and
killing it probably does more harm than good.

Rich

  "Geo"  wrote in message
news:42ffd6ac$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  That makes a lot of sense for a normally running process, but if the =
process is screwed up or hogging the cpu, then things probably aren't =
working properly anyway so I'm not sure that would hold true in those =
cases where you need to terminate something.

  The only case where I use it on a process that isn't screwed up is =
with smtp on a busy server. In that case a normal shutdown can take = quite
a few minutes which is just an unacceptable downtime for smtp so I = use
kill to get in shut down and started back up in just a few seconds. = It's
possible this could corrupt an email but that's better than having =
hundreds of people start calling because they can't use email.

  Geo.
    "Rich"  wrote in message news:42ffc164$1{at}w3.nls.net...
       Killing doesn't allow a process to terminate gracefully.  Buffers =
may not be flushed.  Other processes with which it communicates may not =
get appropriate notice.  When you select end task from the applications =
tab it will send the app the appropriate notice for a graceful shutdown. =
 If you terminate the process from the processes tab you get an =
ungraceful termination.  NET STOP sends the graceful notice appropriate =
for services.

    Rich

      "Geo"  wrote in message =
news:42ff87b1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
      I would guess net stop works fine for a test case, but usually I =
only kill processes that are hung and not responding, in those cases net =
stop is probably too polite.

      Why would you not just kill a process?

      Geo.
        "Rich"  wrote in message news:42ff743c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
           I would do neither.  Have you tried "net stop spooler"?

        Rich

------=_NextPart_000_0239_01C5A117.A6B840E0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   I'm sure I have =
experienced every time=20
of runaway process or hang that you have.  Runaway processes are =
extremely=20
rare in my experience.  Hangs I see more often and honestly, are =
frequently=20
not the due to the process that appears hung or you might guess. 
= On my of=20
my test machines when some app stops responding almost always it is=20
ituneshelper.exe or ipodservice.exe, a process without a visible=20
window.   On another hangs are usually due to a process
that = throttles=20
the number of threads it creates to service requests getting quickly = bombarded=20
with a large number of requests when there is a change in the network=20
configuration.  In neither case is that app that is not responding
= doing=20
anything wrong and killing it probably does more harm than =
good.
 
Rich
 

  "Geo" <georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote=20
  in message news:42ffd6ac$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  That makes a lot of sense for a =
normally running=20
  process, but if the process is screwed up or hogging the cpu, then =
things=20
  probably aren't working properly anyway so I'm not sure that would =
hold true=20
  in those cases where you need to terminate something.
   
  The only case where I use it on a =
process that=20
  isn't screwed up is with smtp on a busy server. In that case a normal =
shutdown=20
  can take quite a few minutes which is just an unacceptable downtime =
for smtp=20
  so I use kill to get in shut down and started back up in just a few =
seconds.=20
  It's possible this could corrupt an email but that's better than =
having=20
  hundreds of people start calling because they can't use =
email.
   
  Geo.
  

    "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42ffc164$1{at}w3.nls.net...
      
Killing doesn't allow =
a process to=20
    terminate gracefully.  Buffers may not be flushed.  Other=20
    processes with which it communicates may not get appropriate =
notice. =20
    When you select end task from the applications tab it will send the =
app the=20
    appropriate notice for a graceful shutdown.  If you terminate =
the=20
    process from the processes tab you get an ungraceful =
termination.  NET=20
    STOP sends the graceful notice appropriate for =
services.
     
    Rich
     
    

      "Geo" <georger{at}nls.net>=20">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>=20
      wrote in message news:42ff87b1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
      I would guess net stop
works fine =
for a test=20
      case, but usually I only kill processes that are hung and not =
responding,=20
      in those cases net stop is probably too polite.
       
      Why would you not just kill a=20
      process?
       
      Geo.
      

        "Rich" <{at}> wrote in message news:42ff743c$1{at}w3.nls.net...
           I
would do =
neither.  Have=20
        you tried "net stop spooler"?
         
        Rich
         

------=_NextPart_000_0239_01C5A117.A6B840E0--

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5