Why isn't closing a program or game instantaneous?

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:03:19 +0100, Paul wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 04:29:36 +0100, John Doe
wrote:

"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote:

When you close a program or game, provided you're not saving a
file, why doesn't it happen immediately? What on earth has it to
do?

It is instantaneous for some programs. Just depends on the program.
Dragon NaturallySpeaking takes a while to close, because it is a complex
program.

I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop
doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.

The power switch works well.

But a power switch doesn't do resource management.

Or, take down resources in an orderly manner (typically
single threaded).

An eight core processor, only manages resources using the
services of one core. Even if the scheduler makes that
thread float from core to core, only one core works on
it at any one time.

If a resource is managed with a linked-list, then you
need to traverse that linked list. Non-optimal memory
traversal happens at 300MB/sec. More optimal traversal
for more ordered things, is 1500-2000MB/sec. (Even though
Intel would tell you your computer has a "bandwidth" of
57600MB/sec.)

If you have a 16GB machine, what does that tell you in terms of
"raw dimensions" ? It might take eight seconds under some
set of optimal conditions, if all the resources are being
used. The bigger the machines get, the slower they are at
management of resource intensive stuff.

In fact, a 16GB machine is just about optimal for the
state of processors today. If you were to own a server
motherboard with AMD Epyc and 2TB of RAM... you would
be a very sad panda indeed. You would be royally ****ed
at "how slow it is". But that's to be expected. Nobody
would imagine a 2TB machine would behave well, and they would
not be disappointed in that regard. You only own a 2TB machine,
for working on 2TB problems. For example, if you were
using Microsoft ICE and working on a huge panorama,
your job would finish *a lot faster* on that Epyc
machine. It takes me a solid week, flat out, to work
on that panorama on my puny machine (image processing
happens at 1MB/sec average when it's paged out to a
disk drive). But, how often do you process
a large panorama ? Not that often.

The good thing is, you can set the RAM the OS uses, in
boot.ini or in the BCD, so you don't actually have to
commission all the RAM at boot time. You can tell the
OS to not use all of it. You can change the dimensions
of the machine at will, without pulling DIMMs from
the machine.

How can "taking down resources" take anything longer than 0 seconds?

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:40:13 +0100, Mike wrote:

On 10/17/2018 8:34 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 04:29:36 +0100, John Doe
wrote:

"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote:

When you close a program or game, provided you're not saving a
file, why doesn't it happen immediately? What on earth has it to
do?

It is instantaneous for some programs. Just depends on the program.
Dragon NaturallySpeaking takes a while to close, because it is a complex
program.

I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop
doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.

This happens with most everything.
Drive your car down the road at 100 MPH.
Turn off the ignition. You'd be very disappointed if the car halted
immediately...as would the people driving behind you.
You might not realize that the power brakes and power steering don't
work so well no more. Orderly shutdown IN CONTEXT is a good thing.

Chill and let the OS people worry about it...or go down to the patent
office and get help protecting your solution.

Nothing like the same thing. Quit a program and no momentum is present that has to be stopped. Just delete that program from memory and that's it.

If you have Windows system sounds, like I have for ages, you can hear
programs closing stuff in the background. Some programs might take
longer than you think, if the time you think it takes is based only on
the window disappearing.

You might have a problem if a program does not signal that it is closing
by closing the active window. At least while someone from the old guard
was at Microsoft's helm, there were visual indications of activity.
Nowadays it's getting a little iffy, like all of the weird stuff in the
file manager, like the window focus changing after deleting a file (that
one is outrageous IMO). To be clear, I am not complaining about Windows,
generally.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:40:16 +0100, Frank Slootweg wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 19:05:52 +0100, Frank Slootweg wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 18:27:24 +0100, Wolf K wrote:

On 2018-10-17 11:34, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
[...]

I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop
doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.
[...]

HDD activity.

Doing what exactly? I've already said the game was saved. Nothing
needs to be recorded to disk AT ALL.

Sigh! As has been said umpteen times: *Freeing* resources, whose
content or/and accounting is - fully or partially - on disk.

Give it a rest, will you!? This - operating system design - is yet
another area you obviously know little to nothing about.

You're talking absolute ****ing bull****.

Sure we do! BTW, exactly how much OS code, including memory management
code, did *you* write!? And for how many decades?

I use common sense, which you have none of.

Freeing a resource takes
absolutely ZERO time. The memory my game was in is now empty.

Did you look up virtual memory management? Did you understand it,
*any* of it!?

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

The memory my game was in is now empty. It
doesn't have to be filled to exit the game.

Exactly *which* part of "on disk" didn't you understand? Exactly
*which* part of "accounting" didn't you understand?

The game isn't on disk, it's in memory. I closed the game. That memory can be ignored. Those addressees can be marked as empty in no time at all. The OTHER programs that I wasn't previously using will have to be put from page file back into memory WHEN I USE THEM, not before.

It only has to be filled
when I start using another program which was previously paged.

Well, you got one bit right. Not that it's *relevant*, but still.

It's very relevant.

Are
you one of the 50% of the population with a 2 digit IQ?

Typical response of a pathetic, ignorant, clueless, stupid, obnoxious,
pompous, chest-thumping, delusional, ****!

No, I'm one of those with a 3 digit IQ. You lot should be killed right now.

You lot
really should be thrown off a cliff.

Nah, no need, you lot are already doing that to yourselves.

We'll survive, the clueless ****s will all die when something difficult arrives.

In article , Jimmy Wilkinson
Knife wrote:

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

what for? you have no clue and only want to troll.

"Mike" wrote

| I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop
| doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.
|
| This happens with most everything.
| Drive your car down the road at 100 MPH.

I'm curious why so many people keep saying things
like this. Do you have software that lags when you
close it? I don't. If I did I'd certainly be wondering
what it's doing between the time I click the X and
the time the window disappears. I'd be running
regmon, filemon, and monitoring Internet activity
or requests. Oddly, Jimmy doesn't seem to be
interested in checking with those tools.

I have found that if I block software from going
online these days, especially installers, it will typically
seem to freeze as it keeps trying without telling me.
Then after maybe 30 seconds it will just continue,
like a child who's tried to grab a handful of cookies,
couldn't reach them, and now is trying his or her
best to look nonchalant.

I just opened a project in Visual Studio. 30-odd
project files. 40-50 DLLs loaded, according to
ProcExplorer. Two temp files opened. When I close it
the window disappears almost instantly. My most
bloated, slowest, pig of a program is Paint Shop Pro
16. It takes several seconds to load and even the
menus are slow. But when I close it, it's gone almost
instantly.

But to read the posts here it sounds like I
may be the only person who's ever seen a
program close promptly.

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:40:16 +0100, Frank Slootweg wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 19:05:52 +0100, Frank Slootweg wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 18:27:24 +0100, Wolf K wrote:

On 2018-10-17 11:34, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
[...]

I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop
doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.
[...]

HDD activity.

Doing what exactly? I've already said the game was saved. Nothing
needs to be recorded to disk AT ALL.

Sigh! As has been said umpteen times: *Freeing* resources, whose
content or/and accounting is - fully or partially - on disk.

Give it a rest, will you!? This - operating system design - is yet
another area you obviously know little to nothing about.

You're talking absolute ****ing bull****.

Sure we do! BTW, exactly how much OS code, including memory management
code, did *you* write!? And for how many decades?

I use common sense, which you have none of.

Your thingy may be "common", but it's no "sense" in any shape or form.

Freeing a resource takes
absolutely ZERO time. The memory my game was in is now empty.

Did you look up virtual memory management? Did you understand it,
*any* of it!?

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

Let's first solve brexit, climate change, wars the world over, etc..
Much easier than explaining operating system design to *you*.

The memory my game was in is now empty. It
doesn't have to be filled to exit the game.

Exactly *which* part of "on disk" didn't you understand? Exactly
*which* part of "accounting" didn't you understand?

The game isn't on disk, it's in memory. I closed the game. That
memory can be ignored. Those addressees can be marked as empty in no
time at all. The OTHER programs that I wasn't previously using will
have to be put from page file back into memory WHEN I USE THEM, not
before.

[Rewind/repeat:]

Did you look up virtual memory management? Did you understand it,
*any* of it!?

[End rewind/repeat.]

It only has to be filled
when I start using another program which was previously paged.

Well, you got one bit right. Not that it's *relevant*, but still.

It's very relevant.

Says he who has no clue *and* is 100% clue-resistant.

you one of the 50% of the population with a 2 digit IQ?

Typical response of a pathetic, ignorant, clueless, stupid, obnoxious,
pompous, chest-thumping, delusional, ****!

No, I'm one of those with a 3 digit IQ. You lot should be killed right now.

Oh deary, yet another 'Arlen'-clone! Why are the ones who *claim* high
intelligence often (always) so utterly stupid (stupid as in being unable
to learn)!?

You lot
really should be thrown off a cliff.

Nah, no need, you lot are already doing that to yourselves.

We'll survive, the clueless ****s will all die when something
difficult arrives.

Contradiction in terms.

Anyway, I'm out of here. Booked myself in for a few root canal
procedures. *Much* more fun!

Mayayana wrote:
[...]

But to read the posts here it sounds like I
may be the only person who's ever seen a
program close promptly.

Well designed software is perfectly free to close its window and do
any and all cleanup after the window is closed.

It also helps if your machine is not starved for memory (RAM). IIRC
our dear friend Jimmy said that his machine was short on RAM.

Anyway, like Jimmy says, it's all BS. Don't let those so called
experts fool you. So they say they know about memory mangement, virtual
memory, page tables, page files, etc., etc.. It's all BS, I tell ye!
Closing a program - *especially* a game - should take *no* time
whatsoever. Jimmy says so and Jimmy is all-knowing *and* - no **** - has
a 3 digit IQ, probably 3 binary digits, but still!

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:


How can "taking down resources" take anything longer than 0 seconds?

Why do I have to convince you of anything ?

You can believe what you want.

Maybe the computer is magic.

Maybe the computer is sentient and only works slowly
because it knows you hate when that happens.

*******

Let's take Jimmy to the bank.

Jimmy "I'd like 9 dollars please"
Teller "But your account only has 6 dollars sir"

That's resource management. We keep track of
who has what. And the tracking (bookkeeping) takes
time. We cannot give out, what we don't have.
"Out of memory".

Jimmy "I have these 4 dollars left over.
Can you keep them in my savings for later?"
Teller "Yes, sir, here, let me write this down
in the big book. I own Jimmy 4 dollars."
Jimmy "Why are you so slow? Can't you write faster?
Can't you write in zero time?"
Teller "I cannot violate the laws of physics"

That's resource management too.

Can Jimmy roll down his car window and throw
the four dollar bills on the ground ? Yes, he
can. But once the bills are lost, they aren't
in the bank, and we don't know what happened to
them. If we're not careful, we would run out of
currency. Nobody could buy anything. The bills
are rotting in a ditch somewhere. Consequently,
users of the bills realize their importance.

In this case, the situation is "special", in that
the program can return the bills a dollar at a
time as a manual operation (that takes time).
Or, the program can just exit(), just like that.
If exit() happens, the computer "goes through the
books" and it realizes Jimmy used to have 4 dollar
bills. It notes the serial numbers of the bills,
and puts evidence of the bills back into the
accounting system. And that takes time. It's
as if Jimmy never made a withdrawal.

If the bills were allowed to just blow around
the street, Jimmys world would need to be
rebooted once in a while, to put all the bills
back in the bank and start the game all over again.

The details of Jimmys adventures at the bank are
not important here. I'm not trying to make a
realistic lifelike example for you. I'm trying
to point out, that "Jimmy" is not the only
player in the story. It's not "Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy".
There is a "Teller", there is a "Bank". There
is a "Big Book". These things matter, even if
you don't care about them.

Paul

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:54:35 +0100, nospam wrote:

In article , Jimmy Wilkinson
Knife wrote:

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

what for? you have no clue and only want to troll.

No, I'm asking a sensible question. If you can'; handle that it's your problem.

In article , Jimmy Wilkinson
Knife wrote:

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

what for? you have no clue and only want to troll.

No, I'm asking a sensible question. If you can'; handle that it's your problem.

so you claim, yet you argue with every answer, as you do with
everything.

On 10/17/2018 3:57 PM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
[...]

But to read the posts here it sounds like I
may be the only person who's ever seen a
program close promptly.

Well designed software is perfectly free to close its window and do
any and all cleanup after the window is closed.

It also helps if your machine is not starved for memory (RAM). IIRC
our dear friend Jimmy said that his machine was short on RAM.

Anyway, like Jimmy says, it's all BS. Don't let those so called
experts fool you. So they say they know about memory mangement, virtual
memory, page tables, page files, etc., etc.. It's all BS, I tell ye!
Closing a program - *especially* a game - should take *no* time
whatsoever. Jimmy says so and Jimmy is all-knowing *and* - no **** - has
a 3 digit IQ, probably 3 binary digits, but still!


Yes 3 digits like so -xxx

In article , Frank Slootweg
wrote:

Jimmy says so and Jimmy is all-knowing *and* - no **** - has
a 3 digit IQ, probably 3 binary digits, but still!

it's decimal, just with leading zeroes (plural)...

On 10/17/2018 4:15 PM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 20:54:35 +0100, nospam wrote:

In article , Jimmy Wilkinson
Knife wrote:

Explain to me how it takes time to delete RAM.

what for? you have no clue and only want to troll.

No, I'm asking a sensible question.* If you can'; handle that it's your
problem.
Have you provided the name of the game or program? Perhaps the issue is
related to a specific game and some of its features. For example, if it
logs into a server it ma take time to properly close that session.

As far as I see, you've asked a vague question making it hard for anyone
to provide sufficient detail in their responses to suit you.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 16:34:29 +0100, "Jimmy Wilkinson Knife"
wrote:

[snip]

I fail to see why even a very complex program takes a long time to stop doing things. Stopping something takes no time at all.

My car's brakes are not that good. How about yours?

A complex program may rely on certain conditions and while
shutting down may do work to keep these conditions true. Files may be
indexed, data may have to be saved, etc.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

On 17/10/2018 17.38, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018 03:49:37 +0100, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

On 16/10/2018 15.38, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 01:47:33 +0100, Ant wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
When you close a program or game, provided you're not saving a file,
why doesn't it happen immediately?* What on earth has it to do?

Probably using a lot of resources like memories, storage, etc.

But stopping using those should be instant.* Just mark them as empty.

Maybe it has to go through a long list and marking each one as free or
whatever, in the correct order. Or worse, it has to load each resource
from disk for some reason before clearing it. Maybe it fills them with
zeroes before releasing them.

I can't see the need for that, it should just say to Windows "this area
of memory is now available for use" then close.

You don't, but they do :-P

If it is a hundred areas, they have to loop through all of them.


Maybe it has to do something online, like log off, if it is one of those
games.

No, that's disabled.

Maybe they don't care :-p


Maybe it checks for some thing, or writes some data to some file.
Status, scores... maybe it has to calculate those first.

No, this still happens if I save the game first, then when exiting I say
"don't save".

It still can do it.

--
Cheers, Carlos.