Back when the persistent cache was first introduced (ver. 5?), my first full scan afterwards took around 45 minutes (call it around 11-12 GB), which I understood was due to having to populate the cache from scratch. Subsequent full scans dropped to around 11 or 12 minutes, which again I had expected from discussions here about the caching.
After upgrading to 7, the first full scan took about 30 minutes, and I assumed it was a repeat of the same situation. However, subsequent weekly full scans are still running about 30 minutes, which makes me wonder if the cache is working properly. And yes, I do have it ticked in both the file shield and scan settings.
I was wondering the same. Since I upgraded to 7, my quick scans last 3 or 4 minutes longer than before. I have done full scan with persisten cache on to store the data and then done the scan using the persistence cache to speed up the analisys and there was only 2 mins gain. No much compare to v. 6
Not knowing if any of you did a clean install I can only venture a guess. If you did a clean install the persistent cache must be re-built from scratch. If you upgraded from the GUI the persistent cache should continue as if nothing happened.
Anyway, after a full scan, the cache should have been already populated and the experience seems it is not… Were we expecting that much about the persistent cache that it could not deliver to us?
I really don’t know what you mean by that, but when running v.6 my first quick scan was about 11 mins afterwads only 8 mins. My first full scan was about 45 mins and after that went down to 38 mins. Now with v.7. My quick scans remain in about 10 mins and my full scans in 45 mins. Mind you I have not added any programs to my comp, but the usual updates.
I was one of the lucky ones who went from 6 to 7 by updating (through the GUI) rather than through a fresh install, with not too many problems.
Even if the cache file had somehow gotten deleted in the process, I would have assumed that avast would re-create the file, and re-populate it during the next full scan. Judging from the replies from others, it just doesn’t seem to be working properly, at least not noticeably. Certainly not to the point where subsequent scans were running approx. 4x faster as they were before the cache was populated, as in the last version.
