6 replies to this topic

[RonnyT]

I have an issue with increased scan time.

I was running version 1.34 with a full scan on 45 minutes, from version 1.36 this full scan takes 2 hours and 45 minutes.
Where most of the scan time is lost on the \Windows\Winsxs folder, i also notice a high CPU load on interrupts during the scan over that folder, sometimes it completely drops to 0% and MBAM seems to freeze during that period.

I'm running Vista SP1, x32, UAC enabled (Scan started with elevated privileges).
The problem occurred on version 1.36 and 1.37, I'm not sure if 1.35 did also but 1.34 does not have this issue.
Disk is 60GB of data in use, \winsxs folder is 7GB large.

I tried to see if uninstalling other security software would help but it does not.

Anybody else experiencing this ?

[RonnyT]

Ran the same scan again with "always scan extra and heuristics objects" disabled, makes no difference.
Attached screen shots for clarification.

Also installed Vista SP2 today makes no difference:

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware 1.37
Database version: 2184
Windows 6.0.6002 Service Pack 2

5/27/2009 4:47:04 PM
mbam-log-2009-05-27 (16-47-04).txt

Scan type: Full Scan (C:\|)
Objects scanned: 187786
Time elapsed: 2 hour(s), 23 minute(s), 52 second(s)

Memory Processes Infected: 0
Memory Modules Infected: 0
Registry Keys Infected: 0
Registry Values Infected: 0
Registry Data Items Infected: 0
Folders Infected: 0
Files Infected: 0

Attached Images

• 
• 

[RonnyT]

Bump ...
BUG ? High CPU Load not seen on Full Scan with v1.34...

[exile360]

This probably has to do with how MBAM reads directories now in the newer version. They optimized the code to actually make it use more resources, which should (in most cases) decrease the overall scan time. However with Vista and the winsxs folder there is a problem, it is a folder that always increases in size until a new installation of Windows is done. For more info please review the following links regarding the winsxs folder:

• Assembly Searching Sequence on MSDN
  
• Vista and winsxs large folder size on Sysinternals Forum
  
• The Secret Of Windows Vista Winsxs Folder on The WinVista Club forum
  
• Vista WinSXS woes & MS Brilliance on La Gubya's Blog

Aside from that, I'm sure you're aware that it is generally only required that users do a Quick Scan to find all the malware on a system that MBAM can detect because it is designed to look in the locations where active malware can be found.

[RonnyT]

exile360, on May 30 2009, 12:15 PM, said:

This probably has to do with how MBAM reads directories now in the newer version. They optimized the code to actually make it use more resources, which should (in most cases) decrease the overall scan time. However with Vista and the winsxs folder there is a problem, it is a folder that always increases in size until a new installation of Windows is done. For more info please review the following links regarding the winsxs folder:

• Assembly Searching Sequence on MSDN
  
• Vista and winsxs large folder size on Sysinternals Forum
  
• The Secret Of Windows Vista Winsxs Folder on The WinVista Club forum
  
• Vista WinSXS woes & MS Brilliance on La Gubya's Blog

Aside from that, I'm sure you're aware that it is generally only required that users do a Quick Scan to find all the malware on a system that MBAM can detect because it is designed to look in the locations where active malware can be found.

Hi Exile,

Thanks for the information, looks like the code optimization backfire's on my system specially in the \winsxs folders, and i don't mind the application taking the CPU it's the Interrupt load that causes doubt about what's happening.

[RonnyT]

RonnyT, on Jun 2 2009, 10:21 AM, said:

Hi Exile,

Thanks for the information, looks like the code optimization backfire's on my system specially in the \winsxs folders, and i don't mind the application taking the CPU it's the Interrupt load that causes doubt about what's happening.

I'd like to report that Version 1.38 fixed the problem :-)
Thanks.

Regards,
Ronny

[AdvancedSetup]

Great. Thank you for taking the time to post a follow-up reply on that.

Cheers.