microsoft

New cool feature enabled in Vista SP1: Hotpatching

franzon   on 11 December 2007 - 12:39 · 43 comments & 30117 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Windows Vista SP1 enables support for hotpatching, a reboot-reduction servicing technology designed to maximize uptime. It works by allowing Windows components to be updated (or "patched") while they are still in use by a running process. Hotpatch-enabled update packages are installed via the same methods as traditional update packages, and will not trigger a system reboot.

Other changes:
  • Improves patch deployment by retrying failed updates in cases where multiple updates are pending and the failure of one update causes other updates to fail as well.
  • Enables reliable OS installation by optimizing OS installers so that they are run only when required during patch installation. Fewer installers operating results in fewer points of potential failure during installation, which leads to more robust and reliable installation.
  • Improves overall install time for updates by optimizing the query for installed OS updates.
  • Improves robustness during the patch installation by being resilient to transient errors such as sharing violations or access violations.
  • Improves robustness of transient failures during the disk cleanup of old OS files after install.
  • Improves the uninstallation experience for OS updates by improving the uninstallation routines in custom OS installation code.
  • Improves reliability of OS updates by making them more resilient to unexpected interruptions, such as power failure
News source: microsoft.com

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 43 additional comments
(2 replies) #1 Neobond on 11 Dec 2007 - 12:41
FINALLY! HOT-PATCHING! YAY!
#1.1 Jugalator on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:23
I must have been totally confused because I always though this was to be a feature of Vista RTM. :/

I thought I kept hearing Vista to be oh so less prone to need reboots... But have hardly seen a difference.

But sure, this is good news.
#1.2 icec on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:21
Ditto. I remember this feature being touted as a selling point for Vista RTM back in the day...
#2 Fubar on 11 Dec 2007 - 12:42
wasnt this supposed to be one of the bonuses when vista was first released ?? it may stop it being triggered for a reboot but i bet you any money for most of the patchers to be applied they will still require a reboot
#3 Budious on 11 Dec 2007 - 12:44
Figures... no one wants to be rebooting Windows 2008 Server... and the code bases are getting synchronized with SP1 release instead of going the split base XP/2003 route of the previous generations. Good feature though none the less and a disappointment it wasn't a part of previous Server versions.
#4 Dynames00 on 11 Dec 2007 - 12:50
nice stuff
(1 reply) #5 +petroid on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:09
I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be in Vista originally. I wondered what became of it. Also, what happened with Freeze Dry? I have noticed rare occurances where the system will restart and automatically log me in and open applications after an automatic reboot, so I guess it is in Vista in some form...
#5.1 dl0711 on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:35
Quote - (petroid said @ #5)
I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be in Vista originally. I wondered what became of it. Also, what happened with Freeze Dry? I have noticed rare occurances where the system will restart and automatically log me in and open applications after an automatic reboot, so I guess it is in Vista in some form...

You are right.. this should have already been in Vista.. but Microsoft Shipped Vista with unfinished code and this is why it was not in when Vista was shipped.
#6 vetHurmoth on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:18
Finally, a feature I can get excited over in Vista! Good going Microsoft
(4 replies) #7 coolkat007 on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:31
Microsoft is on fire now....

why is this the case with Microsoft that when they release anything new they don't cover everything and patching makes it the best?

First its with XP then with Zune now Vista and no one know how many products in between. I really hated XP until sp1 and really liked it when Sp2 was out! loads of features with sp2 and with Zune firmware v2, its gaining the market and I'm sure with vista service packs, people will stop whining about the new OS and will realize that its not just XP with visual changes.
#7.1 Jolidog on 11 Dec 2007 - 16:42
Giving a product something promised for launch a year later is not being on fire, it's putting out fires!
#7.2 coolkat007 on 11 Dec 2007 - 20:10
Quote - (Jolidog said @ #7.1)
Giving a product something promised for launch a year later is not being on fire, it's putting out fires!


Of course its putting out fires but I'm looking at the amount of work being done from Microsoft in the past 2-3 months. Hell loads of releases in this period.
#7.3 Jolidog on 12 Dec 2007 - 11:17
I wasn't undermining que effort or excelence of microsoft software and programers. It's just the way they're making bussiness, basicly I blame the marketting departments!
#7.4 coolkat007 on 12 Dec 2007 - 12:08
Quote - (Jolidog said @ #7.3)
I wasn't undermining que effort or excelence of microsoft software and programers. It's just the way they're making bussiness, basicly I blame the marketting departments!


nope, im not part of MS marketing dept
(1 reply) #8 FATILA on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:35
Vista was stated to need less reboots than XP, this is another step in reboot reduction.
#8.1 Shiranui on 12 Dec 2007 - 01:14
Quote - (FATILA said @ #
Vista was stated to need less reboots than XP, this is another step in reboot reduction.


Actually, Vista was stated as requiring fewer reboots than Xp.
(5 replies) #9 necrosis on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:39
Wow. Windows can finally do something *nix has been able to do for years.
#9.1 vetmarkjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 14:36
Quote - (necrosis said @ #9)
Wow. Windows can finally do something *nix has been able to do for years.
And it took Windows a while to have true account separation and 'run as non-admin', too. And it took Linux until just very recently to have a graphical safe mode if X fails to start.

All OSes are striving to improve. Your point?
#9.2 HawkMan on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:06
Even back in XP most patches wouldn't technically have needed a reboot, even the display driver should technically have been able to have been rpelaced without a reboot. just noone ever did, even on patches that absolutely didn't require it reboots where added to the patch. and they kept doing it with Vista even though they removed even more of the barriers required for reboots.


And if you run a consumer lilnux OS, there's still plenty of reboots required when patching. Being able to do somethign doesn't necessairly mean you do it, or that it's the best choice for every situation.
#9.3 vetmarkjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:10
Quote - (HawkMan said @ #9.2)
And if you run a consumer lilnux OS, there's still plenty of reboots required when patching. Being able to do somethign doesn't necessairly mean you do it, or that it's the best choice for every situation.
I have only seen that for the kernel. And we just got an MS Office update here at work with a forced reboot.

But that is a topic for another thread.


EDIT: And this just posted News item is another Office update that states (in the Microsoft whitepaper)
Quote -
However, if any Office files are in use, a system restart is required and this message will be displayed instead: “Do you want to reboot now to complete the installation of this package?”
I can't recall any OpenOffice or Abiword update that required me to reboot.

Last edited by markjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:25
#9.4 Jugalator on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:41
Quote - (markjensen said @ #9.1)
Quote - (necrosis said @ #9)
Wow. Windows can finally do something *nix has been able to do for years.
And it took Windows a while to have true account separation and 'run as non-admin', too. And it took Linux until just very recently to have a graphical safe mode if X fails to start.

All OSes are striving to improve. Your point?

With your words -- that Windows is aimed for graphical user interfaces and ease of use, while *nix is aimed for security and robustness, I suppose.
#9.5 vetmarkjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 17:23
Quote - (Jugalator said @ #9.4)
With your words -- that Windows is aimed for graphical user interfaces and ease of use, while *nix is aimed for security and robustness, I suppose.
I would say that was a fair assessment of the past for both of those platforms. Recent efforts from both camps are tending to strengthen what has traditionally been considered their weaker points.
#10 SimpleRules on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:51
I think what Vista does at present is not prompt you to restart (mostly) but update when it shuts down, I have seen it a few times after updates that just after it logs off in preperation to shut down, the screen says "Windows is now updating" and explains they can't be updated while they are in use, then 5 minutes later you finally get to shut it down ... I figure then this will no longer happen and they will just be updated live.
(1 reply) #11 vetneufuse on 11 Dec 2007 - 13:57
Does this patch require a reboot?
#11.1 outlando on 11 Dec 2007 - 14:17
Quote - (neufuse said @ #11)
Does this patch require a reboot?

HAAH!!
(4 replies) #12 +kraized on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:05
How secure is this method of updating?
#12.1 vetmarkjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:10
Quote - (kraized said @ #12)
How secure is this method of updating?
Why would you think it would be any less "secure"?
#12.2 Ogmius on 11 Dec 2007 - 18:00
Quote - (markjensen said @ #12.1)
Quote - (kraized said @ #12)
How secure is this method of updating?
Why would you think it would be any less "secure"?


Just think about how easy it could be to compromise a user's machine, no more waiting for reboots to activate cracked/hijacked files, just patch them on the fly and activate the malicious coding. its good and bad at the same time, but all progress is like that.
#12.3 vetmarkjensen on 11 Dec 2007 - 18:15
Quote - (Ogmius said @ #12.2)
Quote - (markjensen said @ #12.1)
Quote - (kraized said @ #12)
How secure is this method of updating?
Why would you think it would be any less "secure"?


Just think about how easy it could be to compromise a user's machine, no more waiting for reboots to activate cracked/hijacked files, just patch them on the fly and activate the malicious coding. its good and bad at the same time, but all progress is like that.
One can already hijack a machine without rebooting. In fact, it's been done since the very dawn of the age of malware.

Rebooting for updating MS Office doesn't make your PC more secure.
#12.4 MioTheGreat on 11 Dec 2007 - 19:15
If a piece of running code has admin access to your system, you're boned anyway. The only way to be secure is to keep UAC on, and remember: LUA.
#13 Tikitiki on 11 Dec 2007 - 15:40
Finally
(1 reply) #14 +xan K on 11 Dec 2007 - 16:42
nice! will it available apart form SP1?
#14.1 Marshalus on 11 Dec 2007 - 17:17
Quote - (xan K said @ #14)
nice! will it available apart form SP1?


Why would it?
#15 doncoyote.cl on 11 Dec 2007 - 17:30
How many hackers must be playing with this new feature right now?
Thanks Microsoft for this wonderful backdoor!

Anyway, is nice to know that from now, less reboots are required.

Good
#16 jefexp on 11 Dec 2007 - 17:50
sounds like a lot of improvements for the installation.....how does that help us, who already have it installed?
#17 Izlude on 11 Dec 2007 - 17:59
ah good, the future has begun!
#18 xmitchx on 11 Dec 2007 - 18:50
Hotpatching makes it so easy to create a programs which inject windows processes. I love it.
(1 reply) #19 Xire on 11 Dec 2007 - 21:05
Why would the most-secure-windows-ever need that powerful patching?
#19.1 advancedboy on 11 Dec 2007 - 21:15
To make it even more secure.
#20 +Raa on 11 Dec 2007 - 22:42
About bloody time too.
This was "supposed" to be a feature in Vista already, but they dropped it!
#21 gigapixels on 11 Dec 2007 - 23:42
Sweet.
(1 reply) #22 Helba on 12 Dec 2007 - 02:28
Why didn't they just build Windows with this feature from the outset, like, how ever many decades ago?

Anyway. Good to hear.
#22.1 QuarterSwede on 12 Dec 2007 - 06:15
That's what I'd like to know. Apple started doing this when they came out with OS X back in .... 2000'ish. It's about time Windows caught up.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)