Windows updates - estimated time
-
snorkie wrote:
I would argue this is a hard problem to solve
Not solvable at all in a realistic sense. The update time depends on the hardware and software on the box. Perhaps even what it is doing right then. So potentially at least about 200 million different combinations (quick google for that number of windows 10 boxes.)
snorkie wrote:
I'll take a moving progress with an inaccurate estimate over nothing.
A very long time ago I had to do several UI progress bars. Very hard to make it progress smoothly. I no longer do UI code but I do need to provide progressive progress data. But still very difficult. I do not attempt to make it smooth rather I just try to make it progress. To do a progress bar with percentages one must have a final count. I was attempting to do this for a recent progress collection and realized that to do that correctly I would have needed to do almost the entire work load to arrive at an accurate figure. And this is something that might (and does) take hours to complete. So doubling that amount of time did not seem like an effective solution. Not to mention the complexity and that there were failure paths as well.
jschell wrote:
The update time depends on the hardware and software on the box.
So base it on the hardware and software on the box! You know what is to be done - how many files opened and closed, how many gigabytes to transfer over which channels. How much processing to be done. If the job comes with estimates from a model machine for each work component, and entries in the registry tells that 'Experience shows that file open on this machine takes 1.4x compared to the model machine, file transfer to disk D: goes at 3x the model machine speed, CPU bound tasks typically takes 70% as long' - then you can multiply actual measurements from the model machine by the local factors and sum it to a total. The finer breakdown of factors, the closer you will get to a correct estimate. It won't be completely off. For a Windows update, the work to be done may not be known until you see which components of the update are relevant for this specific PC, but that you sort out as one of the first tasks. That will tell you how many file open/close, how many gigabytes of file data to transfer from/to which disks, how many seconds CPU each selected tasks requires on the model machine. Then you multiply and add. If the actual times turn out to be off the estimate, you adjust the multiplication factors stored in the registry for the next update, to make a more correct estimate at that time. As long as hardware stays the same, the scaling factors from a model machine, when broken down to a reasonable level such as file open/close, average disk transfer speed, CPU bound processing, ..., will not be terribly different from one Windows update to the other.
-
I agree with this. I try to process any updates as soon as possible so that they don't have the chance to interrupt me later on.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
I access my actual work PC using a laptop via RDP. The work PC is in the server room and ever since it moved there, if refuses to restart automatically and always requires that I call the service desk so someone can go in and power cycle it. Of course, if a monitor, keyboard and mouse are attached it's fine and started from power on is OK. Just warm reboots... So I defer updates until I'm sure there's someone available to push the button!
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
The point is to keep the user "entertained" (so they don't reboot) ... not accuracy.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
Same here. I had a coworker (since retired) who would put off updates for days. To complicate matters, our IT dept. had an application on our machines that would display a window reminding you to reboot that had the "stay on top" enabled. It could be moved out of the way temporarily, but it would move itself back center screen once an hour. He would calmly move it back, every hour :rolleyes: .
Software Zen:
delete this;Gary Wheeler wrote:
He would calmly move it back, every hour :rolleyes: .
After having some problems with HDD encryption (Based on Hardware) after adding a second ETH-Card and all the fight I had with the corporate HelpDesk... I do exactly the same with the "you need to encrypt your D: - Accept - Not Now". Lucky me it only appears 3 times per day.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
He would calmly move it back, every hour :rolleyes: .
After having some problems with HDD encryption (Based on Hardware) after adding a second ETH-Card and all the fight I had with the corporate HelpDesk... I do exactly the same with the "you need to encrypt your D: - Accept - Not Now". Lucky me it only appears 3 times per day.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
Nelek wrote:
"you need to encrypt your D: - Accept - Not Now"
We have that with McAfee Endpoint Encryption. I got so tired of dismissing the dialog that I wrote a little app to watch for the popup and to click the button that dismissed it.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Nelek wrote:
"you need to encrypt your D: - Accept - Not Now"
We have that with McAfee Endpoint Encryption. I got so tired of dismissing the dialog that I wrote a little app to watch for the popup and to click the button that dismissed it.
Software Zen:
delete this;Content for a small tip? No time to think it out myself right now ;P GIMME CODEZZZZZ, PLZZZ, IT'S URGENTZZZZ :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: My luck is, it happens only in the PC (laptop has password), so it only bothers me, when I need to RDP in the PC for accessing the isolated intranet. For the rest I use the laptop.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
I always try to schedule it for overnight so I don't have to think about. Until I come back to the machine and ask why the heck none of my applications are open.
Hogan
snorkie wrote:
Until I come back to the machine and ask why the heck none of my applications are open Windows is asking if it's OK to close Notepad
FTFY
Telegraph marker posts ... nothing to do with IT Phasmid email discussion group ... also nothing to do with IT Beekeeping and honey site ... still nothing to do with IT
-
Rich Leyshon wrote:
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine. So, if you are just turning on your computer for grins then it will only take milliseconds. However, if you have an imminent Teams meeting with all 3 of your supervisors and you've just woken up for the day and your machine must be on, then it will take days. :laugh: Yes, this is based upon my own experience. :rolleyes:
Now, there's the correct answer! Though I've found it's usually then followed by a Zoom update, that is pretty quick but trashes settings and screen layouts so you can spend the first minutes of the meeting fumbling to get those reset; and that's always a meeting where someone has to ask you a question in the first 10 seconds!
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
Sure, the estimates are realistic. They are based on the percent of completion that is on your screen. The percent of completion is based on the following: 1. The current moon phase 2. How close your dog is to you 3. The inverse of the day of the week number, i.e. they take longer on Mondays 4. As @raddevus said
Quote:
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine.
5. How full your coffee cup is; also an inverse relation The formula has been very consistent for the past 25 years :-D
-
I always try to schedule it for overnight so I don't have to think about. Until I come back to the machine and ask why the heck none of my applications are open.
Hogan
Oh not me. I sit patiently watching whatever messages or counters are on the screen and listen for any unnatural clicks or whirring. Not so satisfying now that I’ve switched to SSDs. But habits are deep. And, I ride a Harley, so listening for odd noises is a very ingrained habit. :) :)
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
-
Sure, the estimates are realistic. They are based on the percent of completion that is on your screen. The percent of completion is based on the following: 1. The current moon phase 2. How close your dog is to you 3. The inverse of the day of the week number, i.e. they take longer on Mondays 4. As @raddevus said
Quote:
It's inversely proportional to your necessity of having a working machine.
5. How full your coffee cup is; also an inverse relation The formula has been very consistent for the past 25 years :-D
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
-
I'd love to know how they come up with the estimated times to restart your PC for a Windows update. Do they just see how long it takes on the top-of-the-range development machine with a nuclear powered CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling and hard code that time, or is there some "cleverness" that theoretically looks at the actual PC concerned and makes an estimate? Today's update was estimated at 3 minutes. Actual time to get back to a "normal-looking" screen was 16 minutes. It was 22 mins before CPU and disc usage dropped enough to make it usable. Does anyone else receive more realistic estimates?
