Title: netribe's Replies | WordPress.org --- # netribe [ ](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * [Profile](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * [Topics Started](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/topics/) * [Replies Created](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/replies/) * [Reviews Written](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/reviews/) * [Topics Replied To](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/replied-to/) * [Engagements](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/engagements/) * [Favorites](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/favorites/) Search replies: ## Forum Replies Created Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total) * Forum: [Plugins](https://wordpress.org/support/forum/plugins-and-hacks/) In reply to: [[Event Organiser] Category and venue page](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/category-and-venue-page/) * [netribe](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * (@netribe) * [8 years, 8 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/category-and-venue-page/#post-9539284) * Same problem here. I’m getting this error: * `Uncaught exception 'Exception' with message 'Error in formating DateTime object. Expected DateTime, but instead given boolean' in wp-content/plugins/event-organiser/ includes/event-organiser-utility-functions.php:31` * It looks like eo_get_the_start() and eo_get_the_end() within eo_format_event_occurrence() are returning _false_ for some reason, and the theme compatibility mechanism isn’t handling that too well. * Forum: [Plugins](https://wordpress.org/support/forum/plugins-and-hacks/) In reply to: [[Wordfence Security - Firewall, Malware Scan, and Login Security] Wordfence RAM Memory hog?](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/wordfence-ram-memory-hog/) * [netribe](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * (@netribe) * [11 years, 2 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/wordfence-ram-memory-hog/#post-5345979) * Just to clarify my previous post: not every wordfence installation shows the same amount of memory usage. The scans seem to average at around 40MB, which is fine for us. Some sites deviate considerably though, all the way up to 200 or even 400MB, and a single one of those is enough to threaten the stability of an entire shared server. Here are some logs from other sites that consistently use more RAM than the average – but not as much as the previous example: * ``` [Apr 14 14:37:44] Scan Complete. Scanned 36317 files, 29 plugins, 7 themes, 2959 pages, 3829 comments and 141732 records in 324 seconds. [Apr 14 14:37:44] Wordfence used 186.21MB of memory for scan. Server peak memory usage was: 256.06MB ``` * ``` [Apr 14 07:39:37] Scan Complete. Scanned 7952 files, 25 plugins, 4 themes, 158 pages, 0 comments and 34391 records in 46 seconds. [Apr 14 07:39:37] Wordfence used 152.32MB of memory for scan. Server peak memory usage was: 207.24MB ``` * Forum: [Plugins](https://wordpress.org/support/forum/plugins-and-hacks/) In reply to: [[Wordfence Security - Firewall, Malware Scan, and Login Security] Wordfence RAM Memory hog?](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/wordfence-ram-memory-hog/) * [netribe](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * (@netribe) * [11 years, 2 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/wordfence-ram-memory-hog/#post-5345978) * Wordfence is showing excessive memory usage on several of our sites as well. On one site in particular (a multisite wp), the amount of memory used is especially high. None of the 10 sites on that installation is very large, taken singularly, but as a whole their media files easily total about 4GB. The following lines are from the latest scans: * ``` [Apr 13 15:08:48] Scan Complete. Scanned 66069 files, 47 plugins, 6 themes, 44 pages, 1 comments and 243204 records in 1671 seconds. [Apr 13 15:08:48] Wordfence used 414.96MB of memory for scan. Server peak memory usage was: 506.29MB [...] [Apr 13 15:52:19] Scan Complete. Scanned 66084 files, 47 plugins, 6 themes, 249 pages, 36 comments and 244579 records in 1609 seconds. [Apr 13 15:52:19] Wordfence used 427.90MB of memory for scan. Server peak memory usage was: 506.29MB ``` * It seems there is a lot of database activity related to running scans, and specifically a lot of (costly?) insert queries. Is that normal? This is from our mysql log, for every scanned file: * ``` insert into wp_wfFileMods (filename, filenameMD5, knownFile, oldMD5, newMD5) values ('wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/ascari/thumbs/thumbs_ascari_3.jpg', unhex(md5('wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/ascari/thumbs/thumbs_ascari_3.jpg')), 0, '', unhex('3A2BFE49A543D569065099D7553468E0')) ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE newMD5=unhex('3A2BFE49A543D569065099D7553468E0'), knownFile=0 ``` * Please note that none of those files indexed is new, and their checksum hasn’t changed. Does every record need to be updated every time? We tried adding common image extensions (*.jpg,*.png) to the list of excluded files, but to no avail: the queries are still there. MySql on the server peaks at 200 queries/s for the duration of the scan. * Please address this issue ASAP, since using Wordfence is becoming very taxing on our servers, and even though the plugin on the whole is extremely well done, and we’ve recently purchased several licences, we are considering uninstalling it. Thank you, Enrico * Forum: [Plugins](https://wordpress.org/support/forum/plugins-and-hacks/) In reply to: [[MonsterInsights - Google Analytics Dashboard for WordPress (Website Stats Made Easy)] Admin menu humility](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/admin-menu-humility/) * [netribe](https://wordpress.org/support/users/netribe/) * (@netribe) * [11 years, 9 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/admin-menu-humility/page/2/#post-5260035) * We are actually considering removing this (otherwise great) plugin from our sites, just because of the annoying new menu position. The convenience of having all the GA settings in one place just doesn’t compensate the nuisance of having to explain to clients what that new flashy icon is for, and why they should care( apparently) more than, say, pages or comments. Manually editing every instance of the plugin is out of question of course, since that would disrupt our update workflow. * Please, be considerate, and put the icon back in a more appropriate position. Thank you Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)