objective: within XPProSP2 be able to assign mcafee, and other "mgmt" agents
to one core, and make that core offlimits to everything else. from
experience- opening a file, installing a SP... it is the anti-virus/spyware
that burns CPUs. launching an email attachment is similar- Lotus, Adobe and
the A/V are all competing for cycles. for an example- can this be set in XP
somewhere that mcshield.exe is a foreground process on Proc1, and cannot use
Proc0?

I know that a programmer can use the SetProcessAffinity... but that is
beyond the scope of my time!

my users would be tickled to death to have the full power of a Pent4 2.8
and not feel the impact of mcshield, twigcp, etc

thanks
--
system engineer

Why would you want to prevent the system from using ALL the CPU it has
available to run user applications?

craig wrote:
> objective: within XPProSP2 be able to assign mcafee, and other "mgmt" agents
> to one core, and make that core offlimits to everything else. from
> experience- opening a file, installing a SP... it is the anti-virus/spyware
> that burns CPUs. launching an email attachment is similar- Lotus, Adobe and
> the A/V are all competing for cycles. for an example- can this be set in XP
> somewhere that mcshield.exe is a foreground process on Proc1, and cannot use
> Proc0?
>
> I know that a programmer can use the SetProcessAffinity... but that is
> beyond the scope of my time!
>
> my users would be tickled to death to have the full power of a Pent4 2.8
> and not feel the impact of mcshield, twigcp, etc
>
> thanks

so... you trust the scheduler? no contentions, no spinlock, no annoyances?
I suppose, in a perfect world that would be OK. Do you have experience with
the Dualcore? I am sure you have seen a/v programs eat up CPU and grossly
slow down an SP install. I am sure it hampers loading Acrobat, word, etc.

same singleprocessor machine moves much faster with a/v "on access"
disabled. but we cannot live like that. (back to the perfect world- ie: no
creeps)

thanks
--
system engineer


"Bob I" wrote:

> Why would you want to prevent the system from using ALL the CPU it has
> available to run user applications?
>
> craig wrote:
> > objective: within XPProSP2 be able to assign mcafee, and other "mgmt" agents
> > to one core, and make that core offlimits to everything else. from
> > experience- opening a file, installing a SP... it is the anti-virus/spyware
> > that burns CPUs. launching an email attachment is similar- Lotus, Adobe and
> > the A/V are all competing for cycles. for an example- can this be set in XP
> > somewhere that mcshield.exe is a foreground process on Proc1, and cannot use
> > Proc0?
> >
> > I know that a programmer can use the SetProcessAffinity... but that is
> > beyond the scope of my time!
> >
> > my users would be tickled to death to have the full power of a Pent4 2.8
> > and not feel the impact of mcshield, twigcp, etc
> >
> > thanks
>
>

I think, until one has enough experience with dualcore, leaving the
system to manage will give you less headache.

craig wrote:

> so... you trust the scheduler? no contentions, no spinlock, no annoyances?
> I suppose, in a perfect world that would be OK. Do you have experience with
> the Dualcore? I am sure you have seen a/v programs eat up CPU and grossly
> slow down an SP install. I am sure it hampers loading Acrobat, word, etc.
>
> same singleprocessor machine moves much faster with a/v "on access"
> disabled. but we cannot live like that. (back to the perfect world- ie: no
> creeps)
>
> thanks