TrueImageService.exe takes 100% of CPU

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by WorkForFood, Apr 29, 2005.

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

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Hi,

    I just purchased and installed Acronis True Image 8.0. I am Creating a full image of drive C: on my workstation and placing the backup file in a directory on a server. The backup appears to be running just fine (it is progressing), however my CPU on the workstation that is being backup up is running 100% with 99% of that CPU attributed to the TrueImageService.exe.

    The workstation being backed up is an AMD64 3000+ processor with 1 gigabyte of memory. The drive ( C: ) being backed up is a single ATA (not SATA) drive. The server (really a workstation) that is receiving the backup file has a Pentium 4 3.0ghz processor with 1 gig of memory.

    Both computers involved in the backup are using 1 gigabit NIC's and the data is being sent through a simple 1 gigabit LAN (single 1 gigabit router).

    The backup looks like it is going to take about 1.5 hours.

    When I compare this to the use of Norton Ghost doing this exact same backup the runtimes are comparable but the CPU usage is very different. Norton Ghost takes 20-25% of the CPU to do comparable work.

    Since this is a workstation (I actually use it for development work) having a backup running and using 100% of the CPU is not acceptable.

    I would like to schedule a full backup to run once a week and incremental backups to run throughout the day.

    Is the 100% CPU usage normal behavior? If not, what could be the cause in my case? If this is normal (default) behavior, is there a way to throttle the CPU usage without negatively affecting overall run times?

    I'm hoping to replace Ghost on several workstations but I cannot if the CPU usage profile is going to be so extreme.

    Thanks.
     
  2. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Just one quick update: I have tried this with normal and maxiumum compression. Using normal compression did not alleviate the high CPU usage (still pegged at or near 100%).
     
  3. Detox

    Detox Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    8,507
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    Irrelevant (bashing) guest post removed.
     
  4. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Hi,

    I'm not sure what your post means...

    Did you remove something that someone posted because it wasn't nice (and why would they not be nice to me) or did you remove my post because you thought it was irrelevant?

    Sorry, I don't spend much time on forums and I'm sure that people that do would understand your post, but I'm really not sure myself.

    Thanks for any clarification.
     
  5. collisba

    collisba Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    44
    I'm just guessing, but my thought is that the post removed was bashing the software and wasn't really helpful.

    The only time I've seen TI max out the processor is when you either have some heavy database apps running. I have a document imaging server and an SQL server that maxes out when TI runs... and that's set to normal priority in 1124.

    If you have 1124, you might try dropping the priority to low and see what happens. Wish I could be of more help.

    Brian
     
  6. Detox

    Detox Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Posts:
    8,507
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    Yup it was one of those useless guest posts that pop up every now and then added to a thread like yours... They tend to contain nothing but generalized bashing without introduction of details or actual support issues such as yours.
     
  7. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    I think build 1124 is for "Acronis True Image 8.0 Corporate Workstation". The version I am running is "Acronis True Image 8.0". I am on build 826 which is the current build for my version.

    I don't know if there would be a difference betwee the two versions regarding CPU usage or not. I probably would have paid the extra dollars for the corporate workstation version but I had to buy a minimum of 10 licenses which is more then I initally need (I can buy the non corporate version in increments of 1). So, I don't know if your suggestion would apply to my version or not...

    Thank you.
     
  8. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello WorkForFood,

    Thank you for choosing Acronis Disk Backup Software.

    We regret to inform you that Acronis True Image will get 99% of CPU during the backup creation. However, you may set the priority to lower than Normal. To do that please right click on the Acronsi True Image icon in the task bar and choose "Priority" -> "Low". This will allow other applications to use CPU before Acronis True Image.

    Thank you.
    --
    Ilya Toytman
     
  9. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Thanks for the information. For some reason I did not get an email saying there had been a response posted...

    I will try with LOW and see how it goes!
     
  10. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Hi,

    I tried LOW and the CPU stays around 50% and the workstation is responsive during the backup. That's exactly what I was looking for, except it would be better if there was a way to set the priority in the job itself rather then do it manually (maybe a feature soon?).

    Thanks again
     
  11. MiniMax

    MiniMax Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Posts:
    566
    You could start TI from a CMD-file that contains something like this:
    Code:
    START "True Image 8.0" /LOW %ProgramFiles%\Acronis\TrueImage\TrueImage.exe
     
  12. WorkForFood

    WorkForFood Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2004
    Posts:
    15
    Thanks, that's a good idea. I did notice something and I don't know if it is by design or just a fluke but after changing the priority to low on one of the running tasks the next task also started out as low priority. I do not have to set each task individually, it appears to remember the last setting. By design or a fluke, either way it is what I was hoping for!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.