Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by acillatem, Nov 12, 2011.
I'll give it a try. Could that possibly be slowing my startup scan as well?
Well, with the archives and self extracting archives unchecked, it only took 10 minutes off the scan. A huge drop in the number of objects scanned, as you can see, but still ridiculously long scan time. Unless you have any other suggestions, it's time for me to look for another AV program.
It's an older computer, but that shouldn't matter in this instance, correct? It's a 2003 Dell, FWIW.
As I can't recall the last time I ran a full scan on a system if you find that feature essential maybe you should ran another AV and see if it performs better on that machine
So you don't run full system scans on a regular basis? I never looked at that way, I just figured it was a good idea to do it. The real time protection is most important I guess. The stupid startup scan taking 5 minutes after the computer boots up is ridiculous too.
How do I minimize the risk of a malware attack
As discussed previously in this thread run an in-depth scan at a regular interval that suits your needs. Most run one at an interval not less than once a week.
Yeah, I've always run a scan once a week, but I'm not putting up with this hour and a half scan crap, or the 3-5 minute startup scan. Unless I hear back from the support ticket I create with a resolution, this program is gone from my system.
The scan time also depends on the number of supported compression formats. The more formats a product supports the more time it may take to decompress and scan archives on your disk. That said, a product supporting little compression formats would scan your disk faster because it would simply skip unsupported archives. Decompression of archives is always a time consuming operation.
With all due respect, how does that relate to my hour and a half scan time? Can you tell me why my scans are an hour and a half. Even when I unchecked the boxes next to archives and self extracting archives, it still took an hour and a half, and with 70,000 objects, as opposed to the almost 300,000 before I unchecked those boxes. To be honest, I don't understand your post at all, or how it relates to my issue....sorry.
I'll ask again......could the fact that my computer is about 9 years old have anything to do with it?
I appreciate your help, as well as everyone else that has offered feedback. My renewal comes up in January, and I won't renew it with this behavior, so I hope there is a solution. My startup scan is way too long as well.
Delete all items in the recycle bin, delete temporary files, delete internet temporary files, delete temporary downloads files etc etc. Many of these files are very small and will take longer to scan than larger files.
You say that your PC is 9 years old? This can have a severe impact on scanning when compared to a newer PC. RAM, Hard Disk, and Processor Speed, all make an impact on how fast a virus scan will take.
An example: A 2.1GHz Dual Core Laptop running Windows 7 64bit with 1.5Gb RAM with 150Gb Hard Disk of which 50% is used with 5 DVD-ISOs takes approx. 1 Hour 50 Mins. A Pentium 386 800MHz Laptop running Windows XP with 512mb RAM with 80Gb Hardisk of which 80% is used with 3 DVD-ISOs takes approx. 6 Hours 45 Mins.
Yes, everything is deleted in the recycle bin, and all temp files, etc. etc. I do that just about daily.
I'm running XP, and I have a Pentium4 1.6Ghz, 1Gb RAM, and a 40Gb HD, of which 32Gb is used up. Do you think that is the problem?
Where did you get your examples from, out of curiosity?
Wow I didn't realize this was your thread. My 500 GB drive takes about anywhere from 50 mins to about 1 hour and 15 minutes at the most. It varies because a lot of times I'm using the PC as I scan since this is my main desktop. I mainly surf as I scan but there are times I also was watch short videos on You Tube. For the record I'm running a scan right now.
Scan took exactly 1 hour and 15 minutes. I was surfing and checking email as it scanned.
You say you only have 3 or 8Gb of free space on your Hard Disk? Potential Problem!
1.6Ghz P4 Processor? If this is a Celeron, Potential Problem!
1Gb RAM? How many programs running in background, a lot? Potential Problem!
My examples were produced by me on my hardware. I routinely check many antivirus programs for accuracy, speed, and maximum detection rates.
Many factors can influence the speed of a virus scan, and without someone actually looking at your PC, it can be hard to determine whether the problem is just old, slow hardware, badly configured antivirus settings, undetected malware, or the fact that NOD32 just seems slow on yor machine, whereas some other software may be faster (although I very much doubt it).
Sometimes, just because an antivirus solution seems fast, it doesn't necessarily mean it is doing the job better. The opposite can also be said.
At the end of the day, if the software is working and doing it's job properly, and stopping viruses and malware from entering your system what is the problem?
If you were to say that a full scan takes 6 hours (like my very old laptop with NOD32v5), then there is possibly a cause for concern, but as it only takes approx. 1 hour 30 mins, is this such a large price to pay to give you the satisfaction that your antivirus is doing it's job.
For some people, no antivirus software will ever meet their expectations. The old saying "you can please some of the people some of the time" comes to mind, not that i'm suggesting that you are one of these people.
First off, It's not a Celeron processor, and these scan times are at a time when NOTHING else is running in the background. There is about 8gb free space, yes.
Several people have told me that my scan times are WAY too long, startup scan included.
It wasn't that long ago that my scan times were between 45 minutes and an hour, with version 4, and I haven't added anything significant to my computer in a long time, so for the scan time to double, is ludicrous.
You ask me what the problem is The title of this thread is the problem, and no, I'm not one of those people that can never be pleased, and I appreciate your input, but I'm tired of the startup scan taking forever when I've been told it should only take about 10 seconds, and an hour and a half is too long, especially when the computer is basically unusable during that time.
to me startup scan taking long would be an issue, full scan not all as it can be scheduled whenever. old machine will contribute to things taking longer. You might have to, even with another av, take a view as to perfomance v highest security. and balance it
I wouldn't mind, but the first scan with version 5 took an hour and forty minutes. I've never had a scan take that long, so that's why I came here. Like I said, with version 4, it was always under an hour, but when I tried it again for comparison, it took just as long.
Also, someone here told me the startup scan is much faster in version 5, and should only take about 10 seconds. Mine takes about 5 minutes. That is ridiculous, and I'd appreciate any comments as to why.
ESET emailed back, completely ignored my question about the length of scan times, and focused on changing my settings for the startup scan, so I emailed back and told them my main concern right now is the length of time for the scans. They had me download and run SysInspector and save a copy of the log file and email it to them, so we'll see what they say about this.
They sent me some new configuration to import in, and said to try it with that. It didn't change a thing. The lady actually called my house and talked to me about it. She said that the memory was a little low, with only a little over 300 megs of RAM left. I can't see how that can be, because I have a GB of RAM(not a lot by today's standards, I know), but other than the operating system itself, I don't see what could be using that much memory.
Like I said, it wasn't that long ago that I know for a fact that version 4 wasn't taking this long. It was doing a scan in 45 minutes to an hour max. I've added nothing significant to my computer since then either.
Since the amount of free space on my HDD was mentioned, I moved some music off my computer, and got rid of a few programs I don't use anymore, and ended up with 16.9Gb free space on a 40Gb HDD, and then ran a scan. It still took an hour and 20 minutes. Nothing else running while the scan was running either.
I talked to second level support at ESET today, and the person thought maybe my Hard drive was an old 5400 rpm drive, and that was the issue. It's not.....it's old, but it' still a 7200 rpm drive. I also ran the extended test with the Western Digital diagnostics tool, and it passed all tests, so it seems there is nothing wrong with the hard drive.
Anyone have an idea why it is taking so long?
Try enabling logging of all scanned objects in the scanner setup and run a scan. After the scan has completed, check the log (or supply it to customer care) to find out what archives were scanned and had the biggest effect on the total scan time.
O.k. I'll give it a shot.
I must have done something wrong........this time the scan took over 2 hours, and there is no scan log at all. I checked the box next to 'Log all objects', but that must not be right. I've never seen it not keep a log at all until this. What did I do wrong?
Could someone please tell me how to enable logging of all scanned objects in the scanner setup? I must be missing something really simple. Thanks!
As far as I can see, you've done everything correctly to Log all objects. Why you have no scan log is a mystery that I'm unable to reproduce.
Out of curiosity, did support recommend running Memtest86 or profiling your system with Microsoft's RATTV3?
No they didn't. Never mentioned anything like that. The first person I talked to had me send the SysInspector log, and my settings, she sent back some different settings, that did absolutely nothing,then the next person I talked to blamed my hard drive......the hard drive that completely passed the Western Digital diagnostic tests. He said there was nothing else they could do. I've always had a scan log until the scan after checking that box.
Separate names with a comma.