Can't kill a print job

M

McSpreader

I first encountered this problem when trying to configure a couple
of dedicated print servers. As well as jammed queues the spooler
process would run at about 99% cpu usage.

The batch file I wrote has the line
net stop spooler
rather than
net stop "print spooler"

Both work - any ideas why?
 
J

Jim Macklin

Incorrect settings don't seem to be the issue the OP raised,
but a particular file.

Thanks, I did learn a few new things though.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



| If I knew the answer to your question then I would not
| use my little purge tool. The problem usually occurs when
| there is something wrong with the printer, e.g. an invalid
| printer port (e.g. USB instead of LPT1, or an invalid
| network printer).
|
|
in message
| | > Gee, it only takes a few seconds on my computer, I have
an
| > HP 3820 and it has a pause print and a "cancel all"
command.
| > Some printers say purge, but why would it take hours to
run?
| >
| >
| > --
| > The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
| > But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
| > some support
| > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| >
| >
| >
| > | > | Your method works in theory. In practice there can be
| > | extremely long delays, even hours, until the jobs get
| > | purged.
| > |
| > |
| > | "Jim Macklin" <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm>
wrote
| > in message
| > | | > | > Open printer properties and purge the documents in
the
| > | > buffer.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > --
| > | > The people think the Constitution protects their
rights;
| > | > But government sees it as an obstacle to be
overcome.
| > | > some support
| > | > http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > "Stephen Ford" <[email protected]>
wrote
| > in
| > | > message
| > | > | XP Pro + SP2 + HP Deskjet 840C
| > | > |
| > | > | I think this is the first print job that's gone
wrong
| > | > since upgrading from
| > | > | Win98se. I can't stop a detailed graphics job from
| > | > printing.
| > | > |
| > | > | I suspect there is so much in the XP's buffer that
| > | > cancelling the job and
| > | > | switching the printer on and off to trash the
| > printer's
| > | > buffer still results
| > | > | in masses of junk output.
| > | > |
| > | > | If I want to stop a job in an emegency I cancel
the
| > job
| > | > and sometimes, it
| > | > | depends, remove the paper from the printer and
switch
| > the
| > | > printer off and on
| > | > | maybe feeding one page through until the junk
stops
| > | > printing.
| > | > |
| > | > | It was taking so long presumably because of the
big
| > | > graphics job that I
| > | > | decided to restart XP...
| > | > |
| > | > | ... lo and behold, the print job restarted as if
I'd
| > not
| > | > tried to stop it at
| > | > | all. It's like Glen Close in Fatal Attraction -
the
| > bi*tch
| > | > wouln't die ...
| > | > | :-}
| > | > |
| > | > | Regards
| > | > | Stephen Ford
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|
 
P

Pegasus \(MVP\)

Torgeir Bakken (MVP) said:
Hi,

Actually, the "formula" commonly used in the scripting groups and
command line/batch groups, is that the number behind -n is number
of seconds to pause + 1, so "-n 5" would be closer to 4 seconds than
5 seconds.

Using the VBScript below (using -n 5), I get results from 4.2 to 4.5
seconds.

'--------------------8<----------------------
Set oShell = CreateObject("WScript.Shell")

iStartTime = Timer
oShell.Run "ping.exe localhost -n 5", 0, True
iEndTime = Timer
WScript.Echo iEndTime - iStartTime

'--------------------8<----------------------


--
torgeir, Microsoft MVP Scripting and WMI, Porsgrunn Norway
Administration scripting examples and an ONLINE version of
the 1328 page Scripting Guide:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/default.mspx

You're right!
 
P

Pegasus \(MVP\)

The registry key for this service is "Spooler", and its display
name is "Print Spooler". Either can be used when referring
to the service.
 
S

Stephen Ford

HeyBub said:
Because the son-of-a-bitch deletes the first byte in the queue and
shuffles the remaining 30 million bytes up by one. Then it deletes another
byte.

Well at least it gets faster as it progresses ... :)}
I don't know the ACTUAL reason, but the above theory matches the symptoms.
On a fast printer, you're better off letting the damn thing print 100
pages of trash than to purge the job.

Hmmm ... not so sure about that, but can sympathise with the sentiment. Just
imagin if everyone chose that solution! Best to solve the problem... save
the world?

Stephen Ford
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top