6GB of Memory Used... No Idea Where it Went!

[torrentg]

It's not often I'm amazed. It's not even the computer knowledge. It's beyond that. Damn.

 

[zigzag3143]

Its a Sulphism. handed down thru many generations

 

[avery]

H2SO4 you are really a strong acid. You are right at some points. Can you debug Quick Optimize? I appreciate your comment and time.

Sincerely, I'm not sure whether I understand that statement. Either:

a) You already knew perfectly well that Win7zilla's "extreme optimisation" is a con which would only slow things down (and not a particularly original con either) and now you're bluffing and pretending that "quick optimize" is somehow substantially better in the hope that it'll be sufficiently complex to prevent me from revealing what it does quite so easily.

OR

b) You're a Win7zilla employee, perhaps not one of the developers, and the info I posted about the extremely negative operation of the "extreme optimise" button came as a genuine and unwelcome surprise to you.

If it's (a), no thanks. Without false modesty, I'd be able to discover how any aspect of your app functions under the hood, given time. Since one of the "memory optimisation" modes has been proven to be a con, I don't see what purpose it would serve for me to spend time analysing the mechanism(s) of the other mode.

On the other hand, if the reason for your current request is closer to (b), then I'll do it, but not now - real life intervenes, plus I cringe at some of the stuff I did in that log last night while I was dog tired.

As Teerex said, Win7zilla is a decent-looking utility for controlling registry values which are documented and exposed anyway, and you've got a perfect right to try to earn money by selling "tweaking" software. Where it gets reprehensible is when your non-free product becomes a confidence trick. I resent that type of "tax on the gullible", and I especially resent it when offered up on my fav forum as part of a supposed solution to the OP's problem.

And now, I hope the OP comes back to continue troubleshooting

OP figured it out - NOD32 was loading huge files into memory - essentially, for some reason, it had to keep the entire ISO in memory to scan it (but doesn't have to do that for .AVIs or any other file type...)

So, basically, the download was going directly to memory instead of working properly. Still strange why it wouldn't do that for other filetypes, but it makes sense that it didn't show up in process manager - NOD32 hides its own processes to make it difficult to 'close'. Disabling NOD32 4.0 fixed this problem.

 

[chev65]

This has been an ongoing problem with NOD 32 since day one. That same memory leak problem with NOD32 has come up no less then 25 times.

I could have told anyone that those so called memory optimizers are a joke without ever having to test it. You really went a long way for that one H2 but I can't blame you for being so spektical. The vast majority of those third party optimizers are just pure bunk although I don't think I would have gone so far just to insult the person who posted it.

These types of theads only prove once again that most of those anti virus programs are worse than the programs they are trying to stop.

 

[Calibre12]

I think I had the same problem as you when I mounted a big Iso 3.9 GB with Power iso, it used almost all my 6GB of Ram. I unmouted the image and used Daemon tools Lite intead , everyhting went fine. I hope this will solve your problem.

Using Avg as Antivirus.

 

[H2SO4]

The vast majority of those third party optimizers are just pure bunk although I don't think I would have gone so far just to insult the person who posted it.

It wasn't my intention to "insult the person", and I'm sorry if it came across that way. This is a public forum which aims to help people with computer problems, and my aim was to highlight the negative operation of the "memory optimiser" portion of Win7zilla so that those who are looking may possibly find a countervailing opinion.

For the record, I don't work for Microsoft, nor any of Win7zilla's competitors, nor do I represent SF (obviously). I have absolutely no "skin in the game" one way or the other.

These types of theads only prove once again that most of those anti virus programs are worse than the programs they are trying to stop.

I'm not sure that I agree. Unlike the "memory optimisers" of this world, anti-virus utilities have a very valid function and their design is extremely complex. They have to be everywhere, suspect everyone, inspect everything, and do it all instantaneously while consuming no resources at all. Developers who write the decent AV utilities tend to be clever people, but inevitably there will be breakdowns. (No, I don't work in the AV industry either )

As a total stab in the dark, I wonder whether an ISO is somehow different because it requires both "ends" of the file (header & trailer) to be accessible before the intervening content can be meaningfully inspected? Given multiple posters have now reported similar behaviour with different AV utilities, there may indeed be an architectural reason why ISOs are more demanding.

Anyone?

 

[logicearth]

What I am going have to assume what is happening is NOD32 is loading the ISO into memory while it is expanding and scanning it. Might see if disabling archival opening for the resident scanner solves the problem. I do not have NOD32 so I really do not know what it offers in terms of features and settings.

OP figured it out - NOD32 was loading huge files into memory - essentially, for some reason, it had to keep the entire ISO in memory to scan it (but doesn't have to do that for .AVIs or any other file type...)

So, basically, the download was going directly to memory instead of working properly. Still strange why it wouldn't do that for other filetypes, but it makes sense that it didn't show up in process manager - NOD32 hides its own processes to make it difficult to 'close'. Disabling NOD32 4.0 fixed this problem.

So I was right! :3
Very good, glad you got the issue's caused found.