DrTeeth 5 Posted October 20, 2013 Share Posted October 20, 2013 I do wish that ESET could make the scan progress bars work corrected. Both in v6 and v7, it gets to 91% VERY quickly (2-3 mins of a complete disk scan) and then stays at 99% for the rest of the scan, which can take well over an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Marcos 4,935 Posted October 20, 2013 Administrators Share Posted October 20, 2013 It depends on the number of files, subfolders within a folder as well as on possible archives that are scanned. There's nothing that could be done about it. One thing is that it would take a lot of time to calculate the number of files in each of the folders on a disk, another thing is that it's not possible to estimate the time necessary to decompress archives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTeeth 5 Posted October 20, 2013 Author Share Posted October 20, 2013 I am not asking for perfection, but staying at 99% for well over 80% of the scan? Is there some tweaking that could be done? Why have them if they are so far out? I have 6 licences and approx 15 windows installs covered and the behaviour is consistent. It is not a major issue, but I find it damn annoying . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESET Moderators Aryeh Goretsky 366 Posted October 25, 2013 ESET Moderators Share Posted October 25, 2013 Hello, Unfortunately, as my colleague Marcos pointed out, it's kind of a chicken-and-egg situation: The only way to determine how long it would take to scan all the objects on the disk would be to recursively enumerate them, determine which files are archived, compressed, protected with a runtime packer, etc., apply some general estimates about resources required to scan these, and then generate a progress report based on that. Sadly, this operation would greatly increase the amount of time required to perform the scan, since there is a significant amount of overhead involved in preprocessing all that information. And, of course, it would still only be a "guess." A more accurate one, perhaps, but still a guess. Probably the real solution here is to come up with a better way of displaying the information which doesn't rely on progress bars. They are good when the output being measured is consistent and, well, largely static across systems, but scanning objects for malware is a dynamic activity and does not map very well to a two dimensional line. Regards, Aryeh Goretsky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTeeth 5 Posted October 26, 2013 Author Share Posted October 26, 2013 Thanks Aryeh. How come you have a Hebrew name? Atah Yisraeli? Regards DrT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakasi 549 Posted October 26, 2013 Share Posted October 26, 2013 (edited) I think it is a cool name, regardless of the background / heritage Edited October 26, 2013 by Arakasi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrTeeth 5 Posted October 27, 2013 Author Share Posted October 27, 2013 True, it means 'Lion' in Hebrew. When one is in a small group, one just likes to check out to see if somebody is also a 'member'; nothing more sinister or fishy involved. Unless I communicate in Hebrew here using latin script . Relax, we all like ESET. I left Kaspersky due to the poor software (always same issues after each annual upgrade) and arsey forum administrators who have become dictatorial.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts