On 04:09 PM 12/11/2001 -0500, Anthony Whitesell said:

>Does anyone know how to get McAfee v5.16 and Protel 99SE with SP6 on Windows
>2000 with SP2 to play nice together.  When I start and exit Protel McAfee
>scans everything (taking up to 60% of the CPU resourse).  It also happens
>when I am working in the print preview area.
>
>Anthony W.

Anthony ,

I use McAfee AV (NT 3 though) on Win2k Sp2 with P99SE Sp6, and I also 
*occasionally* get times where McAfee goes to 99% CPU making all operations 
take forever.  Maybe you issue and mine are different.

When I turn off On-Access file scanning things get better.

I have not investigated which files files cause the problem, but I assume 
it is while reading/writing some temp or ini file.  You may be able to set 
up an exclusion so that the Protel folder is not scanned on-access, or 
maybe the win temp folder?  Maybe you can work out which file is causing 
the issue and set up an exclusion for it (maybe restricting it to a 
wildcard file type just in the Protel working folders.)

It does not happen often enough to me to have been bothered investigating 
in any great detail.

In you case maybe your ini files have got very large and are taking a long 
time to scan?  maybe you have scanning set for all files not just program 
files?  maybe it is the 100's of bitmaps that Protel has to load (each 
being a file, rather than lots of bitmaps in one file).

Maybe excluding the Protel program folders from the on-access scanning 
would help (not if it is the ini file though as that is in the Win folder - 
yuk!)

Ian Wilson

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to