Process Lasso v5.1.0.28 quick info

[Jeremy Collake]

This is a simple maintenance release, mostly to update languages. I have yet another version in the works. You know how we do things here, incrementally. I am going to spend some time on this next build though, as I want to run it through some additional testing. Keep in mind, these values are likely better for most people, and will work for everyone, so long as you remember the golden rule: Sometimes you may need to exclude certain processes from restraint. This is the one thing the user may have to tweak under some scenarios. Of course, our (my) goal is to make it so that nobody has to ever tweak a thing, but there's always someone with whom the defaults don't work.

Speaking of the ProBalance defaults. They are now much more elaborate and based on your hardware. I can't say much more about them, but I'm gradually transitioning to what should be a more effective system. I'm taking it gradually because I only have so many different test beds here at Bitsum, and even if I was a major corporation, I'd still not have enough test beds - there are a near infinite number of hardware and software combinations. Throw in unpredictable user behavior and it's impossible to get 100% coverage. Once things enter the real world, the real testing begins. So, by gradually changing them, hopefully we'll catch any negative impact (if there are any) right away.

[edkiefer]

Are you talking about the Probalance setting "total system wide CPU % , Per process CPU % and Per process CPU % when probalance restraint should stop ?
I don't know if PL uses 1 profile default values or is it based on Hardware .
Was think maybe say compare a dual core to quad core the quad core could maybe get away with lower per process % values , since it has more cores to spread out workload .

[Jeremy Collake]

I am talking about a whole series of parameters by which ProBalance determines when to lower a process priority. Many are seen in the ProBalance Parameters/Config dialog, like those you mention.

Process Lasso's defaults have, for a while now, relied on your hardware, taking into consideration many variables. There are a large number of different possible default profiles. I don't want to state too much about it. I give away a lot of secrets already.

The answer is that, yes, the idea is to self-tune to your hardware - instead of having a 'one size fits all' set of defaults. This has been challenging, but worth it in the end.