TeaTimer and WoW patches.

[SuperD38]

Just informing the community of an issue I have found.
I posted about tea timer eating all my system memory before, and decided to give the beta a try.

Well, with the beta, it still is quickly jumping from 45mb to over 200mb when I ended the process.
All is fine until I run two World of Warcraft Patch exe's.
WoW-2.3.0-enUS-Patch.exe (692mb)
and
Wow-2.4.0-enUS-Patch.exe (923mb)
Running either patch will cause teatimer to go into "freakout" mode.

I don't know what interaction the 2 share or why they dislike each other, but it is most defiantly and issue.
Really tough to patch a game when your CPU usage and memory are gone.

Please look into the patch interaction. No idea if it applies to other patches, but it is a hole worth looking into.

[Greyfox]

SuperD38,

There are/were actually two Teatimer beta's, 1.6.1.21 and 1.6.1.22.
As far as I know, these were both released defaulting to "Conserve Memory" mode which restriced memory use to about 45MB for slower low memory platforms, with a registry tweak being able to change to Faster Speed but higher memory use for more modern platforms with plenty of memory. This is the mode I use and in this mode Teatimer uses about 173MB (Task manager references).

I'm not sure what version you are referring to, what your operating system is or what sort of resources your computer has (CPU type, speed, available memory) so it is difficult to comment, however why don't you simply turn off Teatimer whilst you do your update?.

[SuperD38]

TeaTimer Ver 1.6.1.22 (Had an issue with the version that came with spybot 1.6.0.30 as well. )

Win XP pro SP2
1 gig RAM in dual channel mode
AMD 2600+ CPU

Now that I know of the issue I will be disabling teatimer if I patch again. Just reporting a probable bug.

How many SpyBot users would know or even think of disabling TeaTimer when running a patch?
Just adding the information is all.

This "freak out" I reported earlier went as high as 730MB before I ended it, so it's not just a "faster system" setting.

So, if anything, maybe it's just a bug. Just needed to have the information out there is all.