In general, no. Never had it happen to me, either.
* * *ASB* *http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* *Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market… * On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Paul Hutchings <[email protected]>wrote: > Appreciate that, but I don’t know any more myself yet. It’s a general > “If you’re just running a batch file that does “stuff”, would you expect a > scheduled task to behave differently to an interactive task if you hadn’t > done something specific to tell it to?” for now. > > **** > > *From:* Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 20 January 2012 16:00 > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Task Scheduler "throttling" tasks?**** > > ** ** > > I think we need more details to of the scheduled job as well as what the > task does that might be different under a scheduler vs interactively. > **** > > *ASB***** > > *http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker***** > > *Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market…***** > > > > **** > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Paul Hutchings < > [email protected]> wrote:**** > > We have a task (not one of mine so not sure entirely what it is/does that, > when run interactively takes a certain amount of time to complete.**** > > **** > > The same task when run via a scheduled task, takes much longer to > complete. Apparently it’s entirely reproducible and along the lines of a > batch file being run.**** > > **** > > Any ideas why this might be assuming the info I’m being given is accurate > and it’s the exact same command/script is being called via the schedule > task?**** > > **** > > The OS is 2008 R2 SP1.**** > > **** > > Thanks,**** > > Paul**** > ------------------------------ > > *MIRA Ltd***** > > > ** > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
