Can I pause an encode without damaging it??

[imhh1]

I'm encoding movies with Staxrip and there's a pause option that I use when I need to use my pc.
I noticed that it slow down the encode when I resume but I can live with that.

My question is:

Can it cause glitches in the encode or is it 100% safe to use? for how long ?

thank you

[KarMa]

Probably not as safe as just not pausing it but you should be fine, as long as the unencoded frames still in RAM don't get removed along with other temporary encoding data. But them again I have no real experience with the pause button in staxrip.

[jagabo]

I don't use Staxrip but I've used other programs and never had problems pausing encodes. Except when the input or output was on a network connection and the connection was lost (one of the computers went to sleep).

But why pause? You can just run the process at low (idle) priority and you won't even notice it's running in the background.

[imhh1]

ok thank you guys.

I'll try at low priority.

[KarMa]

Or just run it on fewer cores, in Windows 7 taskmanager it's called "set affinity". I regularly drop cores working on an encoding if I need them for something else.

[jagabo]

I prefer to use low priority. A a process running at idle priority only gets CPU time when no other process wants it. If you're browsing the internet and the browser only uses 10 percent of the CPU, the encoder gets the other 90. If the browser suddenly needs 90 percent it gets it, the encoder gets the other 10.

Affinity (or otherwise limiting the number of cores used) is good if you want to keep temperatures low.

[KarMa]

I prefer to use low priority. A a process running at idle priority only gets CPU time when no other process wants it. If you're browsing the internet and the browser only uses 10 percent of the CPU, the encoder gets the other 90. If the browser suddenly needs 90 percent it gets it, the encoder gets the other 10.

Not always the case in my experience, and all my encodings get lowest priority automatically anyway (set that way in megui). For basic browsing, lowest priority is enough. . But lets say I start gaming then it starts to have a noticeable effect even though CPU usage never goes above 70-80% for most my games. I help to resolve this by assigning fewer cores.

[jagabo]

I was going to mention that realtime processes may benefit from limiting cores of background processes. The scheduler has a granularity (20 ms?) so the lag in switching to the higher proirity process may be noticeable in something like a game.

[pandy]

Memory management is also important and directly affecting perceived speed of computer. With insufficient amount of memory OS is forced to use swap and this is perceived as unresponsive computer. So not only task priority but also physical memory available counts.
OP may try to test Process Explorer - it allow to pause process forcibly.

[lordsmurf]

I've had it go both ways.

In fact, multi-tasking has always been an issue, sometimes video encode corruption happens.

Best advice: when encoding, let the computer alone.