Orchid XP v7 nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/12/28 15:32:
> Alain wrote:
> 
>>> It probably doesn't help that the new AV software seems to take ages 
>>> to update itself, and my enemies in the USA have configured it to 
>>> update once per hour (??!!?!)
>>>
>> Your antivirus is probably way to agressive, scanning each and every 
>> files everytimes they are accessed in any way. If a non infectable 
>> file was accessed 10 seconds ago, why scan it again? Why scan it the 
>> first time? Some AV will scan any BMP, TXT and INI files on each access.
>> Look if you can change it's settings, exclude some extentions and 
>> folders.
> 
> We were using Symantec. Only scans files which are actually "executable" 
> in some way. Only bothers to rescan them if they get written to. (Or the 
> definitions are updated.)
> 
>> Change the update scedule from hourly to dayly. Hourly updates often 
>> realy do nothing at all, exept using your resources.
> 
> Indeed. When I was in control of the settings, I had it set to daily. 
> (And a time that won't upset the guys who actually earn our money.) 
> Hourly? WTF? Are you mental??
> 
>> You may try some other AV.
> 
> Nope. Company policy. (Obviously nobody asked me...)
> 
> It's probably not actually a bad product, just silly configuration.
> 
Symantec is notorious for been overly invasive and very resources hungry, 
benchmarks showing up to 80%, and more, performance hit! Some peoples place ther 
products among the worst offenders for bad overall system performances. It 
constantly monitorize every applications behaviour, every read and writes to the 
disk in an attepmt to catch some nefarious act.
Some peoples go as far as to say that you are beter taking your chances without 
ANY AV, than to use Symantec products...

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
History, in general, only informs us of what bad government is.
Thomas Jefferson

Post a reply to this message