Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 12:40 PM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Re: FW: Memory Usage of MessageSniffer 3
Hello Peer-to-Peer,
Friday, August 1, 2008, 10:49:52 AM, you wrote:
snip/
I also have a scheduled reboot every night since we did
confirm w/ Arvel
Hello Peer-to-Peer,
Thursday, July 31, 2008, 10:05:15 PM, you wrote:
Would it be correct to say the higher we can increase the size-trigger
'megabytes' value, the better filtering results (accuracy) we will achieve?
In other words, would it be beneficial for us to purchase more memory on our
-Original Message-
From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Friday, August 01, 2008 10:04 AM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Re: FW: Memory Usage of MessageSniffer 3
Hello Peer-to-Peer,
Thursday, July 31, 2008, 10:05:15 PM, you
Hello Peer-to-Peer,
Friday, August 1, 2008, 10:49:52 AM, you wrote:
snip/
I also have a scheduled reboot every night since we did
confirm w/ Arvel at MDaemon there is a memory leak in MDaemon.exe (if
heavily utilizing their Gateway feature). Have yet to hear anything from
AltN regarding a
: FW: Memory Usage of MessageSniffer 3
Hello Ian,
The new (V3) SNF does use more ram than the old SNF (V2).
GBUdb adds records over time as it learns new IP data.
The amount of RAM that will be used by GBUdb depends on how quickly it
is learning new IPs and how frequently the database
Hello Ian,
The new (V3) SNF does use more ram than the old SNF (V2).
GBUdb adds records over time as it learns new IP data.
The amount of RAM that will be used by GBUdb depends on how quickly it
is learning new IPs and how frequently the database is condensed.
You can set an upper limit on the
