Can I disable services of Eaz-Fix when not in use?

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by paulescobar, Sep 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. paulescobar

    paulescobar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    I have just installed a copy of EAZ-Fix to test out.

    After installation & configuring is done...
    I notice there are three processes that run in the background:
    • SHDSERV
    • ShieldClnt
    • shieldtray

    I've setup EAZ-Fix to be totally manual.
    No "automatic this" or "scheduled that".

    Is it safe to disable all/few of these autoruns & services?
    When needed, I'd just start them up again.
     
  2. farmerlee

    farmerlee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2006
    Posts:
    2,585
    I'm not too sure about that. I'll have to test it out and see what happens.
    They don't consume much resources anyway, only around 20mb of ram. My system has been on for 8 hours SHDSERV.exe has used 18 seconds of cpu time, both ShieldClnt.exe and shieldtray.exe have used 0 seconds of cpu time.
     
  3. paulescobar

    paulescobar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    I'd rather not have all of them running.

    I searched and discovered that "SHDSERV.exe" is essential:
    "a hard-coded scheduler to defrag the current snapshot every hour"

    So I guess my question would only apply to the other two.

    Thanks for any assistance.:)
     
  4. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,041
    Why don't you want them running. See me post to you in your other thread. These services should be an issue and if you are trying to conserve resources this is a bad way to do it.

    You are tampering with the software that you would be relying on to bail you out.
     
  5. paulescobar

    paulescobar Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    That's why I asked.
    I was curious about whether they were necessary...
    Or just left there because of oversight.

    Anyways, I've done more research since posting this topic.
    I've now scratched out "Eaz-Fix" from my list.

    I liked its low disk usage.
    But I didn't like the continuous operation and restriction of disk defragmentation.

    So I guess any future posters can rest easy.
    I don't need answers for this topic.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.