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

How long has this character been impersonating a Starfleet Officer?

Case protection with emphasis in biblatex

Minimum Viable Product for RTS game?

How to fly a direct entry holding pattern when approaching from an awkward angle?

Co-worker sabotaging/undoing my work (software development)

Charging phone battery with a lower voltage, coming from a bike charger?

Critique vs nitpicking

Other than edits for international editions, did Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone receive errata?

How to not let the Identify spell spoil everything?

Crack the bank account's password!

why typing a variable (or expression) prints the value to stdout?

Single-row INSERT...SELECT much slower than separate SELECT

The No-Straight Maze

Eww, those bytes are gross

Count repetitions of an array

Taking an academic pseudonym?

How do I avoid the "chosen hero" feeling?

Can me and my friend spend the summer in Canada (6 weeks) at 16 years old without an adult?

Is it really OK to use "because of"?

What is a good reason for every spaceship to carry gun on board?

How to extract specific values/fields from the text file?

Word for something that's always reliable, but never the best?

How to politely refuse in-office gym instructor for steroids and protein

Is the percentage symbol a constant?



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


Is there any way to attach latrace to an already-running process?How to run linux process and come back to it later?Process history in Unix/Linux systemsIs there a way to suspend an process belongs to shell A and foreground it in shell B?foolproof way to detect if java process is runningHow can I pause or freeze a running process?Why is there no easy way to list all processes in a given process group?Easy way to create a meaningless, cheap, long-running process?Is there a way to change the process group of a running process?Suspend and then resume a process in python scrip - Linux













33















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




















  • 20





    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
    16 hours ago
















33















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




















  • 20





    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
    16 hours ago














33












33








33


5






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

40.5k1479137




40.5k1479137










asked Feb 21 at 12:22









SollosaSollosa

4041717




4041717








  • 20





    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
    16 hours ago














  • 20





    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
    16 hours ago








20




20





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
16 hours ago





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
16 hours ago










7 Answers
7






active

oldest

votes


















74














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



















  • 6





    +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



















72














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



















  • 21





    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..
    2 days ago






  • 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
    yesterday



















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














    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.




























      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
        22 hours ago



















      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
        1 hour ago



















      -2














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






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




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
















      • 11





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

        – JoL
        Feb 21 at 18:16











      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









      74














      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



















      • 6





        +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
















      74














      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



















      • 6





        +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














      74












      74








      74







      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

      9,22621342




      9,22621342








      • 6





        +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














      • 6





        +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








      6




      6





      +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













      72














      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



















      • 21





        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..
        2 days ago






      • 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
        yesterday
















      72














      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



















      • 21





        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..
        2 days ago






      • 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
        yesterday














      72












      72








      72







      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

      307k57581936




      307k57581936








      • 21





        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..
        2 days ago






      • 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
        yesterday














      • 21





        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..
        2 days ago






      • 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
        yesterday








      21




      21





      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..
      2 days ago





      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..
      2 days ago




      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
      yesterday





      @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
      yesterday











      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.

          1,216310




          1,216310























              6














              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














                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












                  6








                  6







                  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 2 days ago









                  Anton TománekAnton Tománek

                  611




                  611




                  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.























                      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
                        22 hours ago
















                      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
                        22 hours ago














                      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
                        22 hours ago



















                      • 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
                        22 hours ago

















                      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
                      22 hours ago





                      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
                      22 hours ago











                      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
                        1 hour ago
















                      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
                        1 hour ago














                      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 1 hour ago









                      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
                        1 hour ago



















                      • Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                        – Ave
                        1 hour ago

















                      Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                      – Ave
                      1 hour ago





                      Surprised that no answer mentioned this yet.

                      – Ave
                      1 hour ago











                      -2














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






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




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
















                      • 11





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

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16
















                      -2














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






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




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
















                      • 11





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

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16














                      -2












                      -2








                      -2







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






                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




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










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







                      share|improve this answer








                      New contributor




                      anony 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




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









                      answered Feb 21 at 17:06









                      anonyanony

                      12




                      12




                      New contributor




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





                      New contributor





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






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








                      • 11





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

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16














                      • 11





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

                        – JoL
                        Feb 21 at 18:16








                      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


















                      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

                      IEEEtran - How to include ORCID in TeX/PDF with PdfLatexIs there a standard way to include ORCID in TeX /...

                      Cicindela nigrior Przypisy | Menu nawigacyjneCicindela varians unicolorManual for the Identification of the...

                      Glossaries-extra: Adding glossaries package to “Clas­sicTh­e­sis” template by Dr. André Miede v. 4.6 ...