How much CPU time does a service use?

[Steve]

Hi

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Thanks

Steve

 

[John John (MVP)]

You can get that from the Task Manager, just click on the Task Manager's
View menu and click on Select Columns...

John

 

[R. McCarty]

TaskMgr, Processes (TAB). Check CPU Time. Clicking the CPU
Time header will sort processes by that criteria, two clicks sorts the
data in reverse order. ( Least to Max ).

Click Start, Run (type) TaskMgr [Enter]

*Click View, Select Columns - add any monitors not shown by default
to obtain more information.

 

[Guest]

And don't forget Process Explorer (free), which runs in place of Task
Manager and does a lot more:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

I find it indispensable.

S

 

[Ian D]

Hi

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Thanks

Steve

Most services don't use any CPU resources unless they're called
on to do something. Task Manager is kind of useless for this as
it only monitors a small number of processes and shows System
Idle at about 99% most of the time.

There's actually a lot happening behind the scenes. Process Monitor
will show all this, but I hope you have fast eyes because it can display
hundreds, or thousands of lines of data per second. Of course your
display will only update at its refresh rate, but you can grab, then scroll
back through the data. The data may not be of any use to you, but will
show you what's going on, such as when your hard drive is showing
a lot of activity, and Task Manager shows nothing.

Process Monitor is available here:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896645.aspx

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Process Lasso

 

[Steve]

Thanks for all the replies, I knew about task manager but I didn't
realise that every service ran as a process.

I tried process monitor but it seems to crash with a windows error
after about five minutes of use each time I run it.

Steve

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Thanks for all the replies, I knew about task manager but I didn't
realise that every service ran as a process.

I tried process monitor but it seems to crash with a windows error
after about five minutes of use each time I run it.

What about Process Lasso?

 

[Twayne]

What about Process Lasso?

Why do you want to know that? What purpose do you have in mind? A
question can't be ansered until all the data is known.

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Thanks for all the replies, I knew about task manager but I didn't
realise that every service ran as a process.

I tried process monitor but it seems to crash with a windows error
after about five minutes of use each time I run it.

What about Process Lasso?

Why do you want to know that? What purpose do you have in mind? A
question can't be ansered until all the data is known.

Twayne,

Please follow the entire conversation, not just a single thread of it. It
will further your understanding.
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/browse_frm/thread/f4ae004c545b9437

If you follow along - you will see that Steve originally asked, "... Is
there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any particular
Windows service ..." and I suggested "Process Lasso" early on.

Steve later responded (unfortunately to themself) that they had tried
another suggestion made in the list of responses (Process Monitor) but was
having trouble with it. It was in response to this that I responded with
"What about Process Lasso?" --> inferring that this may give Steve what
Steve wanted without the trouble they were having with the other product.

It was also a re-iteration of a suggestion in case Steve had merely scanned
the responses and seen "Process ..." several times and assumed they all said
"Process Monitor" --> sometimes it is easy to skip by a suggestion because
you *think* you've heard it before. Better to restate it, so that Steve
might see the difference if they did not see it before.

 

[Unknown]

Don't be too hard on Twayne. He ran a registry cleaner on his brain.

 

[Twayne]

Twayne,

Please follow the entire conversation, not just a single thread of
it. It will further your understanding.

No ... you asked those questions and I wanted to know why you needed to
know them and what purpose it might serve? You asked them in one post,
and I followed that post with my questions. Nothing to do with anything
else. Only your post of that thread was relevant.

 

[Twayne]

Don't be too hard on Twayne. He ran a registry cleaner on his brain.

Another instance of a bunghole makes is irrelevant appearance again.
Duck!

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Is there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service is using? I am using XP Pro SP3.

I am not having any problems, just interested.

Thanks for all the replies, I knew about task manager but I didn't
realise that every service ran as a process.

I tried process monitor but it seems to crash with a windows error
after about five minutes of use each time I run it.

What about Process Lasso?

Why do you want to know that? What purpose do you have in mind? A
question can't be ansered until all the data is known.

Please follow the entire conversation, not just a single thread of it. It
will further your understanding.
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/browse_frm/thread/f4ae004c545b9437

If you follow along - you will see that Steve originally asked, "... Is
there any way to tell how much CPU time (and other resources) any
particular Windows service ..." and I suggested "Process Lasso" early on.

Steve later responded (unfortunately to themself) that they had tried
another suggestion made in the list of responses (Process Monitor) but was
having trouble with it. It was in response to this that I responded with
"What about Process Lasso?" --> inferring that this may give Steve what
Steve wanted without the trouble they were having with the other product.

It was also a re-iteration of a suggestion in case Steve had merely
scanned the responses and seen "Process ..." several times and assumed
they all said "Process Monitor" --> sometimes it is easy to skip by a
suggestion because you *think* you've heard it before. Better to restate
it, so that Steve might see the difference if they did not see it before.

No ... you asked those questions and I wanted to know why you
needed to know them and what purpose it might serve? You asked
them in one post, and I followed that post with my questions. Nothing to
do with anything else. Only your post of that thread
was relevant.

Since you asked for my explanation - I was telling you what was relevant.
You initially did not understand the relevance of my query - it has been
explained to you along with the archived entire conversation, showing you
how it was all connected. You should not disconnect from the whole. My
query is part of the whole and that has now been explained to you in full.
It was *my bad* for not including that in my follow-up questin - for that I
apologize to the OP - although being the initiator of the conversation - it
is highly likely they followed the gist of my query.

You should have been able to make that connection using the same methods I
used to show them to you, albeit you have no need to unless you wanted to
understand - which I assume by the query you made, you did. ;-) If you read
the explanation I have now provided you - you should understand why I asked
the *single* question (only one, not plural.)