Is there a way to pause a running process on Linux systems and resume later?












36















I have to copy files on a machine. And the data is immensely large. Now servers need to serve normally, and there are usually a particular range of busy hours on those.
So is there a way to run such commands in a way that if server hits busy hours, it pauses process, and when it gets out of that range, it resumes it?



Intended-Result



cp src dst

if time between 9:00-14:00 pause process
After 14:00 resume cp command.









share|improve this question




















  • 21





    rsync can resume partial transfers

    – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
    Feb 21 at 15:37






  • 1





    Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

    – Peter Cordes
    Feb 21 at 17:05








  • 8





    Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

    – Mark Plotnick
    Feb 21 at 19:51













  • From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

    – Braiam
    Feb 24 at 20:23











  • @Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

    – Sollosa
    2 days ago
















36















I have to copy files on a machine. And the data is immensely large. Now servers need to serve normally, and there are usually a particular range of busy hours on those.
So is there a way to run such commands in a way that if server hits busy hours, it pauses process, and when it gets out of that range, it resumes it?



Intended-Result



cp src dst

if time between 9:00-14:00 pause process
After 14:00 resume cp command.









share|improve this question




















  • 21





    rsync can resume partial transfers

    – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
    Feb 21 at 15:37






  • 1





    Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

    – Peter Cordes
    Feb 21 at 17:05








  • 8





    Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

    – Mark Plotnick
    Feb 21 at 19:51













  • From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

    – Braiam
    Feb 24 at 20:23











  • @Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

    – Sollosa
    2 days ago














36












36








36


7






I have to copy files on a machine. And the data is immensely large. Now servers need to serve normally, and there are usually a particular range of busy hours on those.
So is there a way to run such commands in a way that if server hits busy hours, it pauses process, and when it gets out of that range, it resumes it?



Intended-Result



cp src dst

if time between 9:00-14:00 pause process
After 14:00 resume cp command.









share|improve this question
















I have to copy files on a machine. And the data is immensely large. Now servers need to serve normally, and there are usually a particular range of busy hours on those.
So is there a way to run such commands in a way that if server hits busy hours, it pauses process, and when it gets out of that range, it resumes it?



Intended-Result



cp src dst

if time between 9:00-14:00 pause process
After 14:00 resume cp command.






process process-management






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Feb 21 at 12:37









Rui F Ribeiro

40.7k1479137




40.7k1479137










asked Feb 21 at 12:22









SollosaSollosa

5391719




5391719








  • 21





    rsync can resume partial transfers

    – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
    Feb 21 at 15:37






  • 1





    Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

    – Peter Cordes
    Feb 21 at 17:05








  • 8





    Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

    – Mark Plotnick
    Feb 21 at 19:51













  • From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

    – Braiam
    Feb 24 at 20:23











  • @Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

    – Sollosa
    2 days ago














  • 21





    rsync can resume partial transfers

    – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
    Feb 21 at 15:37






  • 1





    Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

    – Peter Cordes
    Feb 21 at 17:05








  • 8





    Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

    – Mark Plotnick
    Feb 21 at 19:51













  • From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

    – Braiam
    Feb 24 at 20:23











  • @Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

    – Sollosa
    2 days ago








21




21





rsync can resume partial transfers

– Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
Feb 21 at 15:37





rsync can resume partial transfers

– Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen
Feb 21 at 15:37




1




1





Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

– Peter Cordes
Feb 21 at 17:05







Do you need the actual data to be copied as a backup? If not, could you use cp -al to make a hardlink farm? Or use a filesystem that supports block-level reflinks with copy-on-write, using cp -a --reflink=auto? BTRFS and ZFS support that for copies within the same physical device.

– Peter Cordes
Feb 21 at 17:05






8




8





Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

– Mark Plotnick
Feb 21 at 19:51







Do any of the files in src change between 9:00 and 14:00? If so, simply pausing and resuming the cp process may result in corrupted files. It may be better to run rsync in combination with the timeout command.

– Mark Plotnick
Feb 21 at 19:51















From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

– Braiam
Feb 24 at 20:23





From and to where are the files being copied? Is this a virtual system? What is the source filesystem? What's the purpose of the copy?

– Braiam
Feb 24 at 20:23













@Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

– Sollosa
2 days ago





@Braiam Im using rsync, and copying files from remote unto local machine. I just used cp command as example here btw

– Sollosa
2 days ago










7 Answers
7






active

oldest

votes


















77














You can pause execution of a process by sending it a SIGSTOP signal and then later resume it by sending it a SIGCONT.



Assuming your workload is a single process (doesn't fork helpers running in background), you can use something like this:



# start copy in background, store pid
cp src dst &
echo "$!" >/var/run/bigcopy.pid


Then when busy time starts, send it a SIGSTOP:



# pause execution of bigcopy
kill -STOP "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


Later on, when the server is idle again, resume it.



# resume execution of bigcopy
kill -CONT "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


You will need to schedule this for specific times when you want it executed, you can use tools such as cron or systemd timers (or a variety of other similar tools) to get this scheduled. Instead of scheduling based on a time interval, you might choose to monitor the server (perhaps looking at load average, cpu usage or activity from server logs) to make a decision of when to pause/resume the copy.



You also need to manage the PID file (if you use one), make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it, probably you'll want to clean up by removing the pidfile once the copy is finished, etc.



In other words, you need more around this to make a reliable, but the base idea of using these SIGSTOP and SIGCONT signals to pause/resume execution of a process seems to be what you're looking for.






share|improve this answer



















  • 7





    +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

    – bishop
    Feb 21 at 16:50






  • 1





    Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

    – Evan Benn
    Feb 22 at 2:27











  • @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

    – filbranden
    Feb 22 at 3:02













  • @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

    – filbranden
    Feb 22 at 3:42



















76














Instead of suspending the process, you could also give it lower priority:



renice 19 "$pid"


will give it the lowest priority (highest niceness), so that process will yield the CPU to other processes that need it most of the time.



On Linux, the same can be done with I/O with ionice:



ionice -c idle -p "$pid"


Will put the process in the "idle" class, so that it will only get disk time when no other program has asked for disk I/O for a defined grace period.






share|improve this answer



















  • 22





    This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

    – David Stockinger
    Feb 21 at 16:47






  • 22





    @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

    – Stéphane Chazelas
    Feb 21 at 16:59








  • 5





    Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

    – Mark
    Feb 21 at 22:37






  • 2





    Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

    – R..
    Feb 22 at 19:00






  • 2





    @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

    – terdon
    Feb 23 at 15:00



















8














Use rsync, forget about cp, for this scenario.
there are params to limit bandwith, or can be killed/stoped and started later, in a way it will continue, where it left
google rsync example/s






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




























    6














    Yes, you Need to



    acquire the process id of the process-to-paus (PS), then do
    $> kill -SIGSTOP <pid>


    The process will then Show up with Status "T" (PS). To continue do a



    $> kill -CONT <pid>


    Good Luck!






    share|improve this answer































      3














      If you are going to do it by interrupting the running process, I suggest playing with the Screen program. I haven't used Linux in a while, but IIRC just pausing the command and resuming it later leaves you pretty vulnerable, if you accidentally get logged off you won't be able to resume your session.



      With screen I believe you can interrupt the session then detach it and log out. Later you can go back in and reattach to that session. You'd have to play with it a bit but it made sessions much more robust.



      You can also log out and go home then log in remotely, reattach to the system y you started in the office and resume it for the evening, then pick it up again the next day at work.






      share|improve this answer
























      • I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

        – Sollosa
        Feb 24 at 13:42



















      0














      If your shell supports it (almost all do), you can press ^Z (Ctrl+Z) to easily send a SIGTSTP signal to the foreground task, then continue it with fg (on foreground) or bg (on background).



      If you do this on multiple tasks and want to return to them later, you can use jobs command, then return with fg/bg %#, where # is the number given in brackets on jobs.



      Keep in mind that SIGTSTP is a bit different than SIGSTOP (which is used on all other answers), most importantly due to the fact that it can be ignored (but I didn't see a program ignore it other than sl). More details can be found on this answer on StackOverflow.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

        – Ave
        Feb 25 at 11:23











      • Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

        – Sollosa
        2 days ago











      • @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

        – Ave
        2 days ago











      • I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

        – Sollosa
        yesterday



















      -2














      This can be easily achieved by emitting SIGSTOP signal and SIGCONT to re-initiate the process






      share|improve this answer



















      • 11





        This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

        – JoL
        Feb 21 at 18:16






      • 1





        Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

        – JW0914
        yesterday











      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "106"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f502065%2fis-there-a-way-to-pause-a-running-process-on-linux-systems-and-resume-later%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes








      7 Answers
      7






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      77














      You can pause execution of a process by sending it a SIGSTOP signal and then later resume it by sending it a SIGCONT.



      Assuming your workload is a single process (doesn't fork helpers running in background), you can use something like this:



      # start copy in background, store pid
      cp src dst &
      echo "$!" >/var/run/bigcopy.pid


      Then when busy time starts, send it a SIGSTOP:



      # pause execution of bigcopy
      kill -STOP "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      Later on, when the server is idle again, resume it.



      # resume execution of bigcopy
      kill -CONT "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      You will need to schedule this for specific times when you want it executed, you can use tools such as cron or systemd timers (or a variety of other similar tools) to get this scheduled. Instead of scheduling based on a time interval, you might choose to monitor the server (perhaps looking at load average, cpu usage or activity from server logs) to make a decision of when to pause/resume the copy.



      You also need to manage the PID file (if you use one), make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it, probably you'll want to clean up by removing the pidfile once the copy is finished, etc.



      In other words, you need more around this to make a reliable, but the base idea of using these SIGSTOP and SIGCONT signals to pause/resume execution of a process seems to be what you're looking for.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 7





        +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

        – bishop
        Feb 21 at 16:50






      • 1





        Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

        – Evan Benn
        Feb 22 at 2:27











      • @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:02













      • @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:42
















      77














      You can pause execution of a process by sending it a SIGSTOP signal and then later resume it by sending it a SIGCONT.



      Assuming your workload is a single process (doesn't fork helpers running in background), you can use something like this:



      # start copy in background, store pid
      cp src dst &
      echo "$!" >/var/run/bigcopy.pid


      Then when busy time starts, send it a SIGSTOP:



      # pause execution of bigcopy
      kill -STOP "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      Later on, when the server is idle again, resume it.



      # resume execution of bigcopy
      kill -CONT "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      You will need to schedule this for specific times when you want it executed, you can use tools such as cron or systemd timers (or a variety of other similar tools) to get this scheduled. Instead of scheduling based on a time interval, you might choose to monitor the server (perhaps looking at load average, cpu usage or activity from server logs) to make a decision of when to pause/resume the copy.



      You also need to manage the PID file (if you use one), make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it, probably you'll want to clean up by removing the pidfile once the copy is finished, etc.



      In other words, you need more around this to make a reliable, but the base idea of using these SIGSTOP and SIGCONT signals to pause/resume execution of a process seems to be what you're looking for.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 7





        +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

        – bishop
        Feb 21 at 16:50






      • 1





        Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

        – Evan Benn
        Feb 22 at 2:27











      • @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:02













      • @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:42














      77












      77








      77







      You can pause execution of a process by sending it a SIGSTOP signal and then later resume it by sending it a SIGCONT.



      Assuming your workload is a single process (doesn't fork helpers running in background), you can use something like this:



      # start copy in background, store pid
      cp src dst &
      echo "$!" >/var/run/bigcopy.pid


      Then when busy time starts, send it a SIGSTOP:



      # pause execution of bigcopy
      kill -STOP "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      Later on, when the server is idle again, resume it.



      # resume execution of bigcopy
      kill -CONT "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      You will need to schedule this for specific times when you want it executed, you can use tools such as cron or systemd timers (or a variety of other similar tools) to get this scheduled. Instead of scheduling based on a time interval, you might choose to monitor the server (perhaps looking at load average, cpu usage or activity from server logs) to make a decision of when to pause/resume the copy.



      You also need to manage the PID file (if you use one), make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it, probably you'll want to clean up by removing the pidfile once the copy is finished, etc.



      In other words, you need more around this to make a reliable, but the base idea of using these SIGSTOP and SIGCONT signals to pause/resume execution of a process seems to be what you're looking for.






      share|improve this answer













      You can pause execution of a process by sending it a SIGSTOP signal and then later resume it by sending it a SIGCONT.



      Assuming your workload is a single process (doesn't fork helpers running in background), you can use something like this:



      # start copy in background, store pid
      cp src dst &
      echo "$!" >/var/run/bigcopy.pid


      Then when busy time starts, send it a SIGSTOP:



      # pause execution of bigcopy
      kill -STOP "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      Later on, when the server is idle again, resume it.



      # resume execution of bigcopy
      kill -CONT "$(cat /var/run/bigcopy.pid)"


      You will need to schedule this for specific times when you want it executed, you can use tools such as cron or systemd timers (or a variety of other similar tools) to get this scheduled. Instead of scheduling based on a time interval, you might choose to monitor the server (perhaps looking at load average, cpu usage or activity from server logs) to make a decision of when to pause/resume the copy.



      You also need to manage the PID file (if you use one), make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it, probably you'll want to clean up by removing the pidfile once the copy is finished, etc.



      In other words, you need more around this to make a reliable, but the base idea of using these SIGSTOP and SIGCONT signals to pause/resume execution of a process seems to be what you're looking for.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Feb 21 at 12:48









      filbrandenfilbranden

      9,83621645




      9,83621645








      • 7





        +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

        – bishop
        Feb 21 at 16:50






      • 1





        Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

        – Evan Benn
        Feb 22 at 2:27











      • @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:02













      • @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:42














      • 7





        +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

        – bishop
        Feb 21 at 16:50






      • 1





        Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

        – Evan Benn
        Feb 22 at 2:27











      • @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:02













      • @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

        – filbranden
        Feb 22 at 3:42








      7




      7





      +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

      – bishop
      Feb 21 at 16:50





      +1 See also utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/unix/SIGSTOPUsesAndCautions

      – bishop
      Feb 21 at 16:50




      1




      1





      Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

      – Evan Benn
      Feb 22 at 2:27





      Maybe add a reminder that you should be very careful that '/var/run/bigcopy.pid' still refers to the same process as you think it does. randomly stopping other processes on the system may not be desirable. I know of no safe way to ensure that the pid refers to the program you think it does though...

      – Evan Benn
      Feb 22 at 2:27













      @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

      – filbranden
      Feb 22 at 3:02







      @EvanBenn Yeah that's what I meant in a way with "make sure your copy is actually still running before pausing it" though your point is surely more explicit than that! Yeah checking PIDs is inherently race-y so it's sometimes not really possible to do it 100% reliably...

      – filbranden
      Feb 22 at 3:02















      @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

      – filbranden
      Feb 22 at 3:42





      @cat Not really, a process can't block SIGSTOP. See the link from the first comment: "SIGSTOP is a non-blockable signal like SIGKILL" (or just google it, you'll see that's the case.)

      – filbranden
      Feb 22 at 3:42













      76














      Instead of suspending the process, you could also give it lower priority:



      renice 19 "$pid"


      will give it the lowest priority (highest niceness), so that process will yield the CPU to other processes that need it most of the time.



      On Linux, the same can be done with I/O with ionice:



      ionice -c idle -p "$pid"


      Will put the process in the "idle" class, so that it will only get disk time when no other program has asked for disk I/O for a defined grace period.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 22





        This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

        – David Stockinger
        Feb 21 at 16:47






      • 22





        @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

        – Stéphane Chazelas
        Feb 21 at 16:59








      • 5





        Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

        – Mark
        Feb 21 at 22:37






      • 2





        Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

        – R..
        Feb 22 at 19:00






      • 2





        @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

        – terdon
        Feb 23 at 15:00
















      76














      Instead of suspending the process, you could also give it lower priority:



      renice 19 "$pid"


      will give it the lowest priority (highest niceness), so that process will yield the CPU to other processes that need it most of the time.



      On Linux, the same can be done with I/O with ionice:



      ionice -c idle -p "$pid"


      Will put the process in the "idle" class, so that it will only get disk time when no other program has asked for disk I/O for a defined grace period.






      share|improve this answer



















      • 22





        This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

        – David Stockinger
        Feb 21 at 16:47






      • 22





        @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

        – Stéphane Chazelas
        Feb 21 at 16:59








      • 5





        Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

        – Mark
        Feb 21 at 22:37






      • 2





        Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

        – R..
        Feb 22 at 19:00






      • 2





        @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

        – terdon
        Feb 23 at 15:00














      76












      76








      76







      Instead of suspending the process, you could also give it lower priority:



      renice 19 "$pid"


      will give it the lowest priority (highest niceness), so that process will yield the CPU to other processes that need it most of the time.



      On Linux, the same can be done with I/O with ionice:



      ionice -c idle -p "$pid"


      Will put the process in the "idle" class, so that it will only get disk time when no other program has asked for disk I/O for a defined grace period.






      share|improve this answer













      Instead of suspending the process, you could also give it lower priority:



      renice 19 "$pid"


      will give it the lowest priority (highest niceness), so that process will yield the CPU to other processes that need it most of the time.



      On Linux, the same can be done with I/O with ionice:



      ionice -c idle -p "$pid"


      Will put the process in the "idle" class, so that it will only get disk time when no other program has asked for disk I/O for a defined grace period.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Feb 21 at 14:23









      Stéphane ChazelasStéphane Chazelas

      308k57581939




      308k57581939








      • 22





        This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

        – David Stockinger
        Feb 21 at 16:47






      • 22





        @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

        – Stéphane Chazelas
        Feb 21 at 16:59








      • 5





        Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

        – Mark
        Feb 21 at 22:37






      • 2





        Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

        – R..
        Feb 22 at 19:00






      • 2





        @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

        – terdon
        Feb 23 at 15:00














      • 22





        This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

        – David Stockinger
        Feb 21 at 16:47






      • 22





        @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

        – Stéphane Chazelas
        Feb 21 at 16:59








      • 5





        Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

        – Mark
        Feb 21 at 22:37






      • 2





        Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

        – R..
        Feb 22 at 19:00






      • 2





        @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

        – terdon
        Feb 23 at 15:00








      22




      22





      This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

      – David Stockinger
      Feb 21 at 16:47





      This is a typical case of an XY problem. The question was how to pause a process, but this does not answer the question. While indeed lowering the priority is the better approach to the actual problem, it does not answer the question. I would edit the question to also include how to pause a process and why pausing might be a problem (e.g. file could be edited while paused).

      – David Stockinger
      Feb 21 at 16:47




      22




      22





      @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

      – Stéphane Chazelas
      Feb 21 at 16:59







      @DavidStockinger, technically, this answer tells how to tell the OS to pause the process when it (the OS, CPU, I/O scheduler) is busy (even if it's for fractions of seconds at a time). How to suspend the process manually has already been covered in other answers. This solution doesn't address the problem of files being modified whilst they are being copied.

      – Stéphane Chazelas
      Feb 21 at 16:59






      5




      5





      Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

      – Mark
      Feb 21 at 22:37





      Changing the I/O priority isn't always the best solution. If you're copying from spinning disks, you may still incur a seek before each high-priority request which you wouldn't incur if you completely paused the low-priority operation.

      – Mark
      Feb 21 at 22:37




      2




      2





      Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

      – R..
      Feb 22 at 19:00





      Lower priority does not even solve the problem. Even if the box is completely idle for a few seconds or minutes, that does not mean that a huge copy process which will evict everything from the filesystem cache is going to be unobtrusive. As soon as there's a load again, it's going to be very slow paging everything back in.

      – R..
      Feb 22 at 19:00




      2




      2





      @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

      – terdon
      Feb 23 at 15:00





      @DavidStockinger the preferred way of dealing with XY problems is to give the right solution, even if that's not what the question is asking for. When you know the approach described in the question is wrong, then a good answer doesn't give that wrong approach but instead proposes a better one.

      – terdon
      Feb 23 at 15:00











      8














      Use rsync, forget about cp, for this scenario.
      there are params to limit bandwith, or can be killed/stoped and started later, in a way it will continue, where it left
      google rsync example/s






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.

























        8














        Use rsync, forget about cp, for this scenario.
        there are params to limit bandwith, or can be killed/stoped and started later, in a way it will continue, where it left
        google rsync example/s






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.























          8












          8








          8







          Use rsync, forget about cp, for this scenario.
          there are params to limit bandwith, or can be killed/stoped and started later, in a way it will continue, where it left
          google rsync example/s






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.










          Use rsync, forget about cp, for this scenario.
          there are params to limit bandwith, or can be killed/stoped and started later, in a way it will continue, where it left
          google rsync example/s







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered Feb 22 at 13:44









          Anton TománekAnton Tománek

          811




          811




          New contributor




          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          Anton Tománek is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.























              6














              Yes, you Need to



              acquire the process id of the process-to-paus (PS), then do
              $> kill -SIGSTOP <pid>


              The process will then Show up with Status "T" (PS). To continue do a



              $> kill -CONT <pid>


              Good Luck!






              share|improve this answer




























                6














                Yes, you Need to



                acquire the process id of the process-to-paus (PS), then do
                $> kill -SIGSTOP <pid>


                The process will then Show up with Status "T" (PS). To continue do a



                $> kill -CONT <pid>


                Good Luck!






                share|improve this answer


























                  6












                  6








                  6







                  Yes, you Need to



                  acquire the process id of the process-to-paus (PS), then do
                  $> kill -SIGSTOP <pid>


                  The process will then Show up with Status "T" (PS). To continue do a



                  $> kill -CONT <pid>


                  Good Luck!






                  share|improve this answer













                  Yes, you Need to



                  acquire the process id of the process-to-paus (PS), then do
                  $> kill -SIGSTOP <pid>


                  The process will then Show up with Status "T" (PS). To continue do a



                  $> kill -CONT <pid>


                  Good Luck!







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Feb 21 at 12:46









                  gerhard d.gerhard d.

                  1,246311




                  1,246311























                      3














                      If you are going to do it by interrupting the running process, I suggest playing with the Screen program. I haven't used Linux in a while, but IIRC just pausing the command and resuming it later leaves you pretty vulnerable, if you accidentally get logged off you won't be able to resume your session.



                      With screen I believe you can interrupt the session then detach it and log out. Later you can go back in and reattach to that session. You'd have to play with it a bit but it made sessions much more robust.



                      You can also log out and go home then log in remotely, reattach to the system y you started in the office and resume it for the evening, then pick it up again the next day at work.






                      share|improve this answer
























                      • I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                        – Sollosa
                        Feb 24 at 13:42
















                      3














                      If you are going to do it by interrupting the running process, I suggest playing with the Screen program. I haven't used Linux in a while, but IIRC just pausing the command and resuming it later leaves you pretty vulnerable, if you accidentally get logged off you won't be able to resume your session.



                      With screen I believe you can interrupt the session then detach it and log out. Later you can go back in and reattach to that session. You'd have to play with it a bit but it made sessions much more robust.



                      You can also log out and go home then log in remotely, reattach to the system y you started in the office and resume it for the evening, then pick it up again the next day at work.






                      share|improve this answer
























                      • I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                        – Sollosa
                        Feb 24 at 13:42














                      3












                      3








                      3







                      If you are going to do it by interrupting the running process, I suggest playing with the Screen program. I haven't used Linux in a while, but IIRC just pausing the command and resuming it later leaves you pretty vulnerable, if you accidentally get logged off you won't be able to resume your session.



                      With screen I believe you can interrupt the session then detach it and log out. Later you can go back in and reattach to that session. You'd have to play with it a bit but it made sessions much more robust.



                      You can also log out and go home then log in remotely, reattach to the system y you started in the office and resume it for the evening, then pick it up again the next day at work.






                      share|improve this answer













                      If you are going to do it by interrupting the running process, I suggest playing with the Screen program. I haven't used Linux in a while, but IIRC just pausing the command and resuming it later leaves you pretty vulnerable, if you accidentally get logged off you won't be able to resume your session.



                      With screen I believe you can interrupt the session then detach it and log out. Later you can go back in and reattach to that session. You'd have to play with it a bit but it made sessions much more robust.



                      You can also log out and go home then log in remotely, reattach to the system y you started in the office and resume it for the evening, then pick it up again the next day at work.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Feb 21 at 23:17









                      Bill KBill K

                      224210




                      224210













                      • I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                        – Sollosa
                        Feb 24 at 13:42



















                      • I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                        – Sollosa
                        Feb 24 at 13:42

















                      I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                      – Sollosa
                      Feb 24 at 13:42





                      I'm already using tmux for tha. But I'm writing a script that would be self-aware or preferably environment-aware, so it stops if server gets high traf, and continue when it's normal.

                      – Sollosa
                      Feb 24 at 13:42











                      0














                      If your shell supports it (almost all do), you can press ^Z (Ctrl+Z) to easily send a SIGTSTP signal to the foreground task, then continue it with fg (on foreground) or bg (on background).



                      If you do this on multiple tasks and want to return to them later, you can use jobs command, then return with fg/bg %#, where # is the number given in brackets on jobs.



                      Keep in mind that SIGTSTP is a bit different than SIGSTOP (which is used on all other answers), most importantly due to the fact that it can be ignored (but I didn't see a program ignore it other than sl). More details can be found on this answer on StackOverflow.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                        – Ave
                        Feb 25 at 11:23











                      • Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                        – Sollosa
                        2 days ago











                      • @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                        – Ave
                        2 days ago











                      • I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                        – Sollosa
                        yesterday
















                      0














                      If your shell supports it (almost all do), you can press ^Z (Ctrl+Z) to easily send a SIGTSTP signal to the foreground task, then continue it with fg (on foreground) or bg (on background).



                      If you do this on multiple tasks and want to return to them later, you can use jobs command, then return with fg/bg %#, where # is the number given in brackets on jobs.



                      Keep in mind that SIGTSTP is a bit different than SIGSTOP (which is used on all other answers), most importantly due to the fact that it can be ignored (but I didn't see a program ignore it other than sl). More details can be found on this answer on StackOverflow.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















                      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                        – Ave
                        Feb 25 at 11:23











                      • Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                        – Sollosa
                        2 days ago











                      • @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                        – Ave
                        2 days ago











                      • I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                        – Sollosa
                        yesterday














                      0












                      0








                      0







                      If your shell supports it (almost all do), you can press ^Z (Ctrl+Z) to easily send a SIGTSTP signal to the foreground task, then continue it with fg (on foreground) or bg (on background).



                      If you do this on multiple tasks and want to return to them later, you can use jobs command, then return with fg/bg %#, where # is the number given in brackets on jobs.



                      Keep in mind that SIGTSTP is a bit different than SIGSTOP (which is used on all other answers), most importantly due to the fact that it can be ignored (but I didn't see a program ignore it other than sl). More details can be found on this answer on StackOverflow.






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.










                      If your shell supports it (almost all do), you can press ^Z (Ctrl+Z) to easily send a SIGTSTP signal to the foreground task, then continue it with fg (on foreground) or bg (on background).



                      If you do this on multiple tasks and want to return to them later, you can use jobs command, then return with fg/bg %#, where # is the number given in brackets on jobs.



                      Keep in mind that SIGTSTP is a bit different than SIGSTOP (which is used on all other answers), most importantly due to the fact that it can be ignored (but I didn't see a program ignore it other than sl). More details can be found on this answer on StackOverflow.







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer






                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.









                      answered Feb 25 at 11:23









                      AveAve

                      1036




                      1036




                      New contributor




                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.





                      New contributor





                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.






                      Ave is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                      Check out our Code of Conduct.













                      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                        – Ave
                        Feb 25 at 11:23











                      • Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                        – Sollosa
                        2 days ago











                      • @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                        – Ave
                        2 days ago











                      • I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                        – Sollosa
                        yesterday



















                      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                        – Ave
                        Feb 25 at 11:23











                      • Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                        – Sollosa
                        2 days ago











                      • @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                        – Ave
                        2 days ago











                      • I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                        – Sollosa
                        yesterday

















                      Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                      – Ave
                      Feb 25 at 11:23





                      Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                      – Ave
                      Feb 25 at 11:23













                      Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                      – Sollosa
                      2 days ago





                      Ty Ave, I know this multitasking trick. But for that to happen, one needs be on terminal, whereas I was to build a script that'll do the job on its own, no matter if it takes days.

                      – Sollosa
                      2 days ago













                      @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                      – Ave
                      2 days ago





                      @Sollosa it can be useful to others with the same question, and with access to a terminal.

                      – Ave
                      2 days ago













                      I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                      – Sollosa
                      yesterday





                      I agree. Nice knowing you Ave :)

                      – Sollosa
                      yesterday











                      -2














                      This can be easily achieved by emitting SIGSTOP signal and SIGCONT to re-initiate the process






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 11





                        This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16






                      • 1





                        Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                        – JW0914
                        yesterday
















                      -2














                      This can be easily achieved by emitting SIGSTOP signal and SIGCONT to re-initiate the process






                      share|improve this answer



















                      • 11





                        This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16






                      • 1





                        Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                        – JW0914
                        yesterday














                      -2












                      -2








                      -2







                      This can be easily achieved by emitting SIGSTOP signal and SIGCONT to re-initiate the process






                      share|improve this answer













                      This can be easily achieved by emitting SIGSTOP signal and SIGCONT to re-initiate the process







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Feb 21 at 17:06









                      anonyanony

                      12




                      12








                      • 11





                        This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16






                      • 1





                        Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                        – JW0914
                        yesterday














                      • 11





                        This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16






                      • 1





                        Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                        – JW0914
                        yesterday








                      11




                      11





                      This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                      – JoL
                      Feb 21 at 18:16





                      This doesn't add anything beyond what 3 other answers already provide.

                      – JoL
                      Feb 21 at 18:16




                      1




                      1





                      Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                      – JW0914
                      yesterday





                      Elaborating on the previous comment, since StackExchange is an answers site, posting the entire command required would be encouraged. While your answer is simply an echo of numerous previous answers, it's also only half an answer, as the commands for SIGSTOP and SIGCONT are missing.

                      – JW0914
                      yesterday


















                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f502065%2fis-there-a-way-to-pause-a-running-process-on-linux-systems-and-resume-later%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

                      ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

                      Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?