Additional features for future avast! versions...

[xyzzy]

Our discussion aside, I am interested in what Avast advise to people regarding Automatic Windows Update.

Fix your PC then.

Problem is on Microsoft Updates and how Windows deal with svchost.exe priorities. It's not on my computer, but in every computer worldwide. In yours too... just that you don't want/need/know how to fix it.

While such issues appear, they can be repaired (meaning something got broken in WU).
Have you tried something like this?

X.

[Lisandro]

While such issues appear, they can be repaired (meaning something got broken in WU).
Have you tried something like this?

It's nothing broken on my WU neither in yours. It's just the priority of the service that hogs the system, take all the resources. Following that instructions (which are very good) won't help... WU is working but it's a resource hog.
I wish there is an answer to avoid this situation (the priority and CPU consumption by WU).

[Vladimyr]

On XP, Windows Update and Microsoft Update appear to run completely unthrottled under SVCHOST.EXE.

MU is worse because even when set to "Notify me but don't..." it compares every MS software component on your PC against the latest update on their server. This routinely took 15 to 20 minutes (Athlon XP 2600+, 1GB RAM) during which time the PC was practically unuseable so I began just killing it using 'Process Explorer', until one time when some files were corrupted and I had to 'System Restore'.

So on home PC, I've reverted to WU only, Notify - and periodically manually check for Office 2003 updates. (Though there was an update for Outlook a few days ago - maybe it was a 'priority' or MS have changed the way WU and MU are differentiated?)
On work PC (where I'm the only user) updating is fully user-initiated - which reminds me - I'd better check for updates...

[Lisandro]

This routinely took 15 to 20 minutes (Athlon XP 2600+, 1GB RAM) during which time the PC was practically unuseable

That's my bad...

So on home PC, I've reverted to WU only, Notify - and periodically manually check for Office 2003 updates.

I'd rather set everything to manual... But it's an option, my choose, nothing else.

[xyzzy]

MU is worse because even when set to "Notify me but don't..." it compares every MS software component on your PC against the latest update on their server.

As far as I can tell this is not true. Update checks for avaliable components and if they are superseded by already installed patches ONLY. See here and many other sites.

This routinely took 15 to 20 minutes (Athlon XP 2600+, 1GB RAM) during which time the PC was practically unuseable so I began just killing it using 'Process Explorer', until one time when some files were corrupted and I had to 'System Restore'.

My first computer with XP was 800MHz Celeron with 256 MB RAM. I've never noted such problems. Spikes of CPU/IO usage- surely, but nothing significant.

Still, I'm interested in what Avast could say on this topic.

EDIT: OK, maybe I know why you have this problem. That's because you set Update to retrieve and install patches automatically! Afair I've always set it to retrieve and notify, so that all patches are installed on computer shutdown.

X.

[DavidR]

If you check you will see that there are existing problems with svchost taking 100% of the CPU, there have been a attempts to fix it that have failed. This isn't effecting everybody but enough for it to be a concern.

From the Windows Secrets newsletter 21 June 2007.

Full story, http://windowssecrets.com/comp/070621#story1.

[Vladimyr]

Thanks DavidR  the 'Windows Secrets' link answered my question...

So on home PC, I've reverted to WU only, Notify - and periodically manually check for Office 2003 updates. (Though there was an update for Outlook a few days ago - maybe it was a 'priority' or MS have changed the way WU and MU are differentiated?)

Household Member 3 recently installed 'Live Messenger' but hasn't again complained (at least not to me) of 100% CPU cycles. Maybe we've been successfully "patched". Further investigation required...

[Lisandro]

Fix your PC then.

The svchost.exe saga has persisted for months

Readers of the paid version of Windows Secrets are familiar with this story by now. Editorial director Brian Livingston first reported the issue nearly a year ago, on July 27, 2006. Contributing editor Susan Bradley has documented Microsoft's attempts to solve it in the Jan. 18, Apr. 19, May 10, and May 24 issues this year. The problem has risen to a such a degree that we feel all Windows users should be aware of it.

Microsoft has long known of issues with svchost.exe — the process that runs services of DLLs (dynamic link libraries). There are many symptoms associated with the problem. Among the most common is a drastic slowdown of computer performance as svchost.exe consumes memory and CPU cycles.

The cause of the issue turned out to be the service that provides Automatic Updates. In response, many users began disabling Microsoft Update, an enhanced version of the more-limited Windows Update.

It's not only me... Thanks David.

[DavidR]

Your welcome, this is effecting a number of users in one way or another and it still baffles Microsoft to fix it as previous patches supposedly to fix this have failed for a lot of people. So it isn't a user fix.

[Lisandro]

So it isn't a user fix.

Yeah... that's my point of view.