Hard Disk Monitoring

I just noticed a small error in the daily status report I received. Specifically, the report grossly underestimates the System Idle Time (and seems to reset its value when it shouldn't). Below are the values I received for the last three reports:

• Received This Morning:
  System Uptime : 2 days, 1 hours, 5 minutes, 58 seconds
  System Idle Time : 0 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes, 48 seconds
  
  Received Yesterday Morning:
  System Uptime : 1 days, 1 hours, 5 minutes, 57 seconds
  System Idle Time : 0 days, 3 hours, 55 minutes, 44 seconds
  
  Received Two Mornings Ago:
  System Uptime : 0 days, 1 hours, 6 minutes, 58 seconds
  System Idle Time : 0 days, 0 hours, 0 minutes, 2 seconds

The System Uptime matches pretty closely with the data reported by another program (System Explorer from http://systemexplorer.net) that monitors such data. But for this morning (about 20 minutes after the time of the report being generated), System Explorer reports the idle time as being 1 day, 19 hours, 53 minutes (which seems much more likely than HDS' value).

FYI, I'm running HDS v5.01 Pro under Windows 7 Pro/64 SP1.

Thanks for your message and attention.

Not really sure what can cause the difference.
Generally I can confirm that the system idle time checked by examining when the last input received from the actual user, for example mouse moved or key pressed.
Maybe something (a running application) causes that this value reset on your system - and this is why the system idle time seems less.

I'll reproduce and examine the difference and check what may cause a reset of the system idle time counter.

Thanks for your attention !

I forgot to ask: do you use Hard Disk Sentinel in application or service mode?
This may be important as in service mode different method is required in order to detect the idle time.

hdsentinel wrote:Maybe something (a running application) causes that this value reset on your system

But it's not being reset on my system - the idle time reported by the program System Explorer is constantly incrementing (until I restart my computer). However, it is being reset on the HDS report.

This isn't a big issue, but I want you to understand where the bug actually is.

Application mode.

Also, don't forget to read my reply to your first post in this thread (you haven't made it public yet).

> the idle time reported by the program System Explorer is constantly incrementing (until I restart my computer).

The idle time should always reset when there is user input, when the mouse moved or a key pressed.
Do you see that time resets in the other tool?

hdsentinel wrote:> The idle time should always reset when there is user input, when the mouse moved or a key pressed.
Do you see that time resets in the other tool?

Ahh, that explains the difference! System Explorer's Idle Time is a cumulative value (and is reset to 0 after each reboot).

Personally, I find System Explorer's value a bit more useful (especially when generated as part of a daily report), but clearly this is more of a difference of opinion versus some absolute truth. So it's not an HDS bug, but rather part of the design of the report by HDS ("It's not a bug, it's a feature!" ).

Thanks, I see

Excuse me for the confusion.

Originally the idle time was not included in the report in old versions, but some users asked to include the idle time, which measured since the last user input. This should reflect how long the system is inactive (not performing user actions), not used. This may be used to determine if the systems are still running - but inactive and admins can enable different power management settings (to enter standby after long time of inactivity) where appropriate.

I did not know the other tool shows cumulative idle time. Personally I do not really feel it is useful (know no real uses), especially that the total system uptime is also displayed in the report. So that may show how long the CPU is really idle - which may be interesting, but yes, this is different from the "idle time since last user input" which is included in Hard Disk Sentinel report.

Thanks for your attention anyway and excuse me for the possible confusion