eschw95458 Posted November 21, 2012 Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 So RetroISA is almost 100% on one core of the cpu. I have followed your guide on the instant scan advanced options and set change StartRetroISA=1 to StartRetroISA=0 but when I quit retroISA and it restarts, the ini file reverts to 1 and retroISA just continues to run. This is on retrospect 10 latest version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeflynn@ertp.com Posted November 21, 2012 Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 I'm running into the same problem here on an older 8 Core Mac Pro with my process meter showing RetroISA using 199% CPU (almost two whole cores). Obviously, this is not ideal. Not sure what the instant scan advanced options change you mentioned is yet. I will see if I can find that and try it. JFly Retrospect Client 10.0.0 (174) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eschw95458 Posted November 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2012 It is here in the knowledge base http://kb.retrospect.com/articles/en_US/Retrospect_Article/RetroISA-Advanced-Options/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordandill Posted November 26, 2012 Report Share Posted November 26, 2012 See http://forums.retrospect.com/index.php?/topic/149942-version-10-comments-background-app-is-expensive-docs/page__st__20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airnorth Posted December 2, 2012 Report Share Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) I've found the only way to reduce the CPU cycle usage was to exclude all mounted volumes in the config file. My problem now is that the retroISA process continues to consume large amounts of RAM - between 1.18 and 1.25GB. That seems excessive and I have not found a way to reduce it. Killing the process and restarting starts at a few MB but rapidly grows to consume over 1GB in seconds. Has anyone else observed this? Today, retroISA process is consuming 1.15GB real memory and 1.22GB virtual memory. On an 8GB system this is a lot of memory to be eating up for one process. This really needs to be corrected along with the excessive CPU usage of the scanning. Edited December 4, 2012 by airnorth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.