Feature request: exclude processes from a drive from ProBalance restraint

[justneedtogetsomehelp]

Dear all / developers

This would be a useful feature, since it would allow me automatically to exclude installers - which I keep on a particular drive - from restraint.

Thanks.

[BenYeeHua]

Your ID.
Not bad.
----
Not a bad feature, as some people need installer finish the install ASAP, so it don't biting the I/O and causing the I/O lag.

[Jeremy Collake]

This would be a useful feature, since it would allow me automatically to exclude installers - which I keep on a particular drive - from restraint.

You can use wildcards, which should be largely effective.

For instance, "e:\setup*.exe" .. or "e:\*" if the entire drive is installers. EDIT: Exclusion pathname matching is not enabled. It will be in future versions.

Does that fulfill your need?

[edkiefer]

You can use wildcards, which should be largely effective.

For instance, "e:\setup*.exe" .. or "e:\*" if the entire drive is installers.

Does that fulfill your need?

I was going to post same thing about wildcards but didn't know you can combine with path's to .
*.msi would be another install wildcard option .

A lot of installers are listed/named abc_setup.exe  would *setup.exe be right or setup*.exe ?
I am thinking first one

[Jeremy Collake]

Actually, you are right, you can't do as I suggested! I thought I allowed matching exclusions by pathnames, but checking the code, I didn't . The rationale was possible mismatches. However, that can be mitigated.

So, I will work on allowing path matches. I'll do that immediately. Then the suggestion I made would work .

Thanks for bringing this up!

[Jeremy Collake]

And, until then, good exclusions might be:

*setu*.exe
*instal*.exe
*.msi

That would cover many installers... though it wouldn't cover some that use temporary files for executables.

[edkiefer]

And, until then, good exclusions might be:

*setu*.exe
*instal*.exe
*.msi

That would cover many installers... though it wouldn't cover some that use temporary files for executables.

Yes, wildcard support is very powerful , if you get paths working that would be move flexibility .

[BenYeeHua]

Yes, wildcard support is very powerful , if you get paths working that would be move flexibility .

Yup, I like the wildcard too, just be careful when using it.

[Jeremy Collake]

What I've done is added a new toggle to allow matching of pathnames to ProBalance exclusions.

This will be present in Process Lasso version 6.6.0.63 beta and later. I'm going to make a couple more modifications to the ProBalance Exclusions Dialog, then will release a beta.

[justneedtogetsomehelp]

I've only just discovered these replies to my question. 

And my reply to those replies is . . good job! Excellent. Just what I need. Thank you.