Mike - i haven't noticed anything like this. i've been using Win2K for
about a year now, used a couple of different VMs and images without seeing
(that i remember) anything like what you are describing.

david

At 05:59 PM 1/24/02 +0000, you wrote:
>If I do a long Squeak calculation like
>	[true] whileTrue: [12 / 4]
>the Windows 2000 scheduler will only occasionally give any other "normal
>priority" Win32 process any CPU time.  Other processes, even those who
>are "on top", will be almost entirely deprived of cycles.  For example,
>the TaskManager CPU graph or list of running processes no longer updates
>regularly, often pausing for 20 seconds.  Similarly InternetExplorer and
>the FileManager become very unresponsive.
>
>I have also noticed the same behavior if I compact a Celeste mail
>database (which involves lots of memory allocations and IO) rather than
>an endless simple loop.
>
>Interestingly, a second simultaneously running Squeak VM is not affected
>while the first runs the endless loop.  It responds normally though all
>of this, and does not seem noticeably slowed down, for instance quickly
>opening a change sorter.
>
>When I am able to finally bring up the TaskManager, I can eventually
>lower the priority of Squeak.exe and the system immediately becomes
>responsive again.
>
>As a test, I wrote a small C program to duplicate this endless loop. 
>When I run it, the CPU meter pegs at 100%, but the system does not
>become unresponsive.
>
>Has anyone else seen anything like this under Windows NT or 2000?  Is
>this a side effect of something done intentionally in the VM?   I do not
>remember seeing problem under Windows 98.
>
>Mike
>
>
--
David Farber
dfarber at numenor.com