Scheduled Task?

[JVC]

So.... let me get this right. The system under question here is running Vista SP2 and current with updates. When I run the current version of Eraser on a file, Eraser schedules a task, immediately runs it (erases the file) and then continues running in the background with a tray icon. Is there any way around this behavior? On my XP computer and running an older version of Eraser, it's possible to quickly erase a file and then Eraser shuts off. IOW, no Eraser Scheduler in the tray.

Did I set something up incorrectly when I installed this new version on my Vista computer? Is it possible to revert back to the older behavior in the new version of Eraser?

TIA,
J. Corliss

 

[DavidHB]

Actually, this question has been asked many, many times. I suggest that you go to the FAQ (link below) and read the topic on Eraser architecture. As you will see, with the next release of Eraser, Joel hopes to have the background component implemented as a service, which means that there will then be no running process.

We have all been conditioned to regard running processes as intrinsically evil. In reality, course, some are better behaved than others, and I have never found the Eraser process to be a problem in my systems (including my ancient, low spec. XP laptop). But if you really hate it, you can close the running process (right-click on the tray icon, then select 'Exit Eraser); the process will then reopen only when you invoke Eraser. You will, of course, lose the Eraser scheduling capabilities, but that may not be an issue for you.

David

 

[JVC]

We have all been conditioned to regard running processes as intrinsically evil. In reality, course, some are better behaved than others, and I have never found the Eraser process to be a problem in my systems (including my ancient, low spec. XP laptop). But if you really hate it, you can close the running process (right-click on the tray icon, then select 'Exit Eraser); the process will then reopen only when you invoke Eraser. You will, of course, lose the Eraser scheduling capabilities, but that may not be an issue for you.

I don't think all running processes are evil, just unnecessary sometimes. In the case of Eraser, the only way I ever use it is to select one or more files in Windows Explorer, then right click and select "Erase". I never use the scheduling feature, ever, and don't understand why it isn't entirely optional. Whether it's a process or a service, I have no desire for it to be running in the background, sucking up resources however small the demand. That the process opens every time I invoke Eraser is an irritant to me and I keep turning it off in the tray just like you described. Guess I'll go looking for a comparable program that doesn't exhibit this behavior. Thanks, and over and out.

 

[DavidHB]

The only practical reason to be worried about the use of system resources is if it is preventing their use for higher priority purposes. In the present case, as you will see from other recent and current topics, the issue (if there is one) is not with the Eraser process as such but with the fact that the .NET runtime, once invoked (by any program that uses it) tends to stay resident in RAM. However there is as yet no conclusive evidence that this necessarily impacts on system performance.

That said, I agree that (as with Eraser 5) it should not be necessary to have a running process if you don't need it for the scheduler. Joel plans to fix this in the next release, in which, we hope, the Eraser core will run as a service rather than as a process.

David

 

[JVC]

The only practical reason to be worried about the use of system resources is if it is preventing their use for higher priority purposes. In the present case, as you will see from other recent and current topics, the issue (if there is one) is not with the Eraser process as such but with the fact that the .NET runtime, once invoked (by any program that uses it) tends to stay resident in RAM. However there is as yet no conclusive evidence that this necessarily impacts on system performance.

That said, I agree that (as with Eraser 5) it should not be necessary to have a running process if you don't need it for the scheduler. Joel plans to fix this in the next release, in which, we hope, the Eraser core will run as a service rather than as a process.

David

The only practical reason in *your* opinion. I don't like cluttering things up in any way, form or fashion. That's *my* opinion.

I simply removed Eraser 6 from my HP which is running Vista, and installed the older version of Eraser (5.84). It probably doesn't erase shadow copies, but I can live with that. With the single exception of software firewalls, I don't like programs which install services or processes. And I *never* use Eraser's scheduler. I see no reason for Eraser to have anything running in the background, at least the way that I use it. I also see no reason for Eraser to *leave* anything running in the background after I use it to get rid of a file.

 

[DavidHB]

I don't like cluttering things up in any way, form or fashion. That's *my* opinion.

To which you are fully entitled. But, in my opinion, that is not a 'practical' (or perhaps I should have said 'functional') reason for disliking the running process; it is simply a matter of personal taste. which others who are reading this topic may or may not agree with.

I simply removed Eraser 6 from my HP which is running Vista, and installed the older version of Eraser (5.84). It probably doesn't erase shadow copies, but I can live with that. With the single exception of software firewalls, I don't like programs which install services or processes. And I *never* use Eraser's scheduler. I see no reason for Eraser to have anything running in the background, at least the way that I use it. I also see no reason for Eraser to *leave* anything running in the background after I use it to get rid of a file.

As it happens, 5.88 is the final release of version 5. But my honest opinion is that reverting to the obsolete and moribund version is no loner a helpful way to responding to version 6.0.7's actual or perceived deficiencies. Better to stick with Version 6, and participate in the process of making it better. As I have said, Version 6.2 will deal with your specific issue.

David