"Buffalo"  wrote in message news:lov5qn$egi$1@dont-email.me...
>
>"FredW"  wrote in message 
>news:lgs5r91elu6ls53ijmhd6outdujceo8r93@7ax.com...
>>
>>On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:12:30 +0200, FredW  wrote:
>>>On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 14:35:27 -0600, "Buffalo"
>>
>>>>
>>>>Just checked my Pro MBAM (ver: 1.75.0.1300) the memory usage on my Win7 
>>>>HE
>>>>64 bit system running in real time, not doing a scan, and it is aprox 
>>>>370MB
>>>>of ram. WoW!  WOW!!
>>>>mbamgui.exe *32 = 11.MB
>>>>mbamservice.exe *32 = 254MB
>>>>mbamscheduler.exe *32 = 107MB
>>>
>>>
>>>I use Win7HP64SP1 and MBAM Pro (ver. 1.75.0.1300) real-time.
>>>mbamgui.exe *32 = 3.572 K
>>>mbamscheduelr.exe *32 = 4.020 K
>>>mbamservice.exe *32 = 63.840 K
>>>
>>>when I start the scanner and do nothing:
>>>mbam.exe *32 = 130.844 K
>>>
>>>Maybe the memory usage increases over time?
>>>
>>>Started a full scan,
>>>mbam.exe *32 = 137.xxx - 162.xxx (peak) K
>>
>>Later on ...
>>Scheduled full scan is running.
>>
>>mbam.exe *32 = 209.576 K +/-  (211.412 K when scan is completed.)
>>mbamgui.exe *32 = 3.712 K
>>mbamscheduler.exe *32 = 4.060 K
>>mbamservice.exe *32 = 67.096 K
>>
>>mbam.exe *32 is gone when scanner is closed after full scan.
>>
>
>My mbam.exe *32 is also gone unless the scanner is actually running.
>Amazed at the difference in memory usage between your computor and mine, 
>unless your numbers are those when MBAM is not being used for real time 
>protection.
>Still, a tremendous difference.
>My mbamscheduler.exe *32   107MB  compared to your reading of 4KB
>mbamservice.exe *32  254MB  compared to your reading of 67KB
>
>I don't understand why!!  :(
>
Well, now I do. Dumb me.  :(
I was reading the Peak Working Set (Memory) values in Task Manager and not 
the Memory (Private Working Set) numbers.
Now my readings are comparable to FredW's reading.
Time for a beer, ice cold with the glass frosted.  :)
Have a happy 4th.
Buffalo
-- 
Buffalo 

--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2