pudelein
2009-02-20, 18:24
I am currently using SSD 1.6.2.46 on Windows XP S3 HE, but some of the following applies also to 1.6.0 and possibly to older versions also. For the record, recent scans have required around 20 to 22 minutes to complete.
I have long been troubled by instances in which scans run for twice as long as normally, up to 40 or 45 minutes. It has just dawned on me that many (all?) of the "slow" instances are associated with occasions when I update the program or its malware definitions and then scan immediately without closing SSD. If I then close the program, re-open it, and try another scan, the time drops back to the more typical low values. Is this plausible? Should users be told to close SSD after updating and then to re-open it before scanning?
This morning, for example, immediately after updating to the 02/18/2009 definitions and updating the immunization, I ran a scan without closing SSD: I aborted this scan manually after about 37 minutes, closed SSD, abd cleaned my "trash" with CCleaner: this found < 1 MiB to remove. After re-opening SSD, a subsequent scan ran completely in just under 21 minutes. I had a similar experience last week after using the internal updater to update the program, rebooting; and updating the definitions to 02/11/2009. The immediate scan took just under 44 minutes; an independent scan took just over 22 minutes.
FWIW, my impression is that SSD does not "freeze" anywhere; it just runs very slowly more-or-less everywhere.
Again FWIW, I do not find similar behavior with other antimalware scanners, including Ad-Aware, SuperAntispyware, and MalwareBytes' Antimalware.
I have long been troubled by instances in which scans run for twice as long as normally, up to 40 or 45 minutes. It has just dawned on me that many (all?) of the "slow" instances are associated with occasions when I update the program or its malware definitions and then scan immediately without closing SSD. If I then close the program, re-open it, and try another scan, the time drops back to the more typical low values. Is this plausible? Should users be told to close SSD after updating and then to re-open it before scanning?
This morning, for example, immediately after updating to the 02/18/2009 definitions and updating the immunization, I ran a scan without closing SSD: I aborted this scan manually after about 37 minutes, closed SSD, abd cleaned my "trash" with CCleaner: this found < 1 MiB to remove. After re-opening SSD, a subsequent scan ran completely in just under 21 minutes. I had a similar experience last week after using the internal updater to update the program, rebooting; and updating the definitions to 02/11/2009. The immediate scan took just under 44 minutes; an independent scan took just over 22 minutes.
FWIW, my impression is that SSD does not "freeze" anywhere; it just runs very slowly more-or-less everywhere.
Again FWIW, I do not find similar behavior with other antimalware scanners, including Ad-Aware, SuperAntispyware, and MalwareBytes' Antimalware.