After updating to 6.0.2.8 system slow, so went back to 6.0.1.88

[rd25994]

Yesterday after seeing the RSS item about 6.0.2.8 being released, I used the right-click check for updates method to update.
My system was very draggy after that, so I reverted to the 6.0.1.88 I had been using, as the system was as responsive as usual.
I looked for posts yesterday, and again today, so maybe I'm the only one who had trouble with it.
My system is a Win7 Home Premium 64-bit with 16 GB of RAM.
I've only been using PL for about two months, but have some rules made that let my system avoid being dragged down by tasks that were not controllable before I found PL.
Its not worth getting into the details of my rules and applications, as fast as PL gets updated, whatever the problem was may be straightened out in some future update.

[Jeremy Collake]

Sorry you've had troubles!

Update related fixes to 'problems' are normally cosmetic, or - more likely - feature additions. When there are crashes, they are rare and do not affect overall system performance. No problem has ever affected system performance. The number of updates is just a sign of activity.

I think what you see is likely coincidence because the changes between those two versions shouldn't have made any bit of difference.

If you have a bunch of rules defined, then definitely post the INI file here (see Options / Advanced), OR try the 'Reset all configuration to Defaults' to see if that makes a difference. It could be a simple matter of needing to exclude a process related to a real-time security scanner, for instance.

[BenYeeHua]

And maybe you can also provide the "Actions log" at the bottom of PL, with version 6.0.1.88 and 6.0.2.8.
So we can find which software/process is/is not restraint between 2 version.

[rd25994]

Now with 6.0.2.30 my system is as responsive as usual, with PL governing the targeted tasks set for background running.

Since PL doesn't control everything, there are periods where what it doesn't govern may take over temporarily, e.g., like a virus scanner update, and that might have happened right after the 6.0.2.8 update, leading me to jump to a conclusion that something had gone wrong.

[BenYeeHua]

Ya, because after update, the PL file is some new file for anti-virus, so it will scan the file.

[danlock]

This is.... sorta related.     After updating today, I noticed something on a page linked to from the Revisions page and thought I'd comment:

[. . .]Native, unmanaged [x86 and x86-64 code] makes our core engine highly efficient and able to respond more quickly to changing system conditions. No competitor can match the performance of our core engine. [. . .]We even went one step further and used the lowest level API available for process management - the largely undocumented NT Native APIs. We hope our customers appreciate our dedication to software efficiency.

I know I do (appreciate your dedication to software efficiency)!

Merry Christmas and/or Happy Holidays,

Jesse

[BenYeeHua]

Ya, as a non-stop background process, it has to getting the most performance with less process time, so when some CPU eater running, it can prevent been bit too much and causing itself lag too.
----
Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year too.

[Jeremy Collake]

@danlock: Thanks, glad you appreciate it . I must admit, if I used managed code, development would be easier, the GUI perhaps prettier, and probably fewer bugs. However, native code simply runs a whole lot faster, period .

@rd: Thanks for the update. Glad the issues did not persist. I think it was something unrelated, or some special set of conditions, like you describe. Keep an eye on it!

Merry Christmas (belated) and a Happy New Year!


P.S. Sorry for the delay in response, every once and a while I just have to take a break