Re: increasing handles | large VM consumption | windows service on Win2k server

From: Ryan Ackerman (Ryan_at_SofTulz.Net)
Date: 04/14/04 

Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:23:22 -0700

If you think you might not be freeing resources in your app, I try and use
smart pointers where ever possible because I human and make lots of
mistakes...

 CComPtr<IEnumWbemClassObject> pEnum;
 CComPtr<IWbemClassObject> pObject;

And you said that you used proc explorer to look at the open handles... were
you looking a named handles as well as un-named? It was your process that
was leaking right?

Do you use any other librarys or is it only wmi calls? 

-- 
Ryan Ackerman
http://www.SofTulz.Net
SofTulz.Net, Providing Administrators with more free time through
automation.
Ryan@SofTulz.Net
"Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT]" <ivanbrug@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:eQ1NotaIEHA.2376@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> The problem is not easy in general.
> For example, if you are using EOAC_SECURE_REFS on your service,
> and WinMmgt is indicating instances to your process, and there is
different
> identity
> between the time the interface was marshaled and when it's used,
> then your interface will be released by RPCSS way after you are done with
> your async query.
> There are a handful of other cases that would be quite long to enumerate.
> They involve different apartments, different identities,
> cross process and cross machine boundaries.
> Just to make sure this is the problem, if you let the service sit around
> for few minutes after is has finished it's own activity, does the service
> recover it's memory usage ?
> There are generic leak tracking tools, like UMDH.exe.
> You will be finding (pseudo) leaks in, maybe, rpcrt4, wbemprox, fastprox,
> wbemcomn,
> but, you may be able to guess which interface pointers are really leaked.
>
> -- 
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights.
> Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified at
> http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
>
>
> "Levi Wilson" <lewilson@purdue.edu> wrote in message
> news:OUOCrsZIEHA.3968@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > Ivan, I really appreciate all of your help, and i'm sorry if i'm being a
> > pain...
> >
> > What do you mean un-authenticated calls that perform cleanup?  I must be
> > missing something here, but what you said sounds like what is happening,
> > obviously some resources aren't being cleaned up, it's just that I was
> under
> > the impression that releasing my interface pointers was enough for the
> > cleanup of these resources.  I mean, it's the exact same thread that's
> doing
> > the same work running under a windows service as it is when it runs as a
> > consol application, so i'm not making the connection here.  Do you have
> any
> > suggestions or techniques for me to track down this issue, or to track
> down
> > what I need to do differently to ensure that these resources are being
> > released?  Please let me know any information would be useful for you to
> > help with this, and i'm sorry if I don't give enough information.
Thanks,
> > again, in advance for any help!
> >
> >
> > "Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT]" <ivanbrug@online.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23RJ4InXIEHA.3432@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > One example:
> > > you process may not allow un-authenticated calls to come through.
> > > Certain un-authenticated calls may be used to perform cleanup.
> > > If this does not happen the regular way, then your code may have to
wait
> > > until
> > > RPCSS runs the distributed garbage collection.
> > > This way the resources are "leaked" till they are reclaimed.
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> > rights.
> > > Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms specified
at
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> > >
> > >
> > > "Levi Wilson" <lewilson@purdue.edu> wrote in message
> > > news:u9Oe$hVIEHA.3848@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > sorry, I do keep adding pieces, and here's anothere one :-D  It runs
> > under
> > > a
> > > > domain administrative account, not as local system when it's running
> as
> > a
> > > > service.  When you say COM initialization, are you talking about
> > > > CoInitializeSecurity() and CoInitializeEx()?  My DCOM permissions
are
> > set
> > > up
> > > > dynamically depending on the OS of the machine that i'm connecting
to
> > with
> > > > calls to CoQueryProxyBlanket() and CoSetProxyBlanket(), so I don't
> > > > understand the differences when it's running under svchost.exe as
> > opposed
> > > to
> > > > explorer.exe...any ideas on where I could start to look/what to look
> > for?
> > > >
> > > > "Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT]" <ivanbrug@online.microsoft.com> wrote in
> message
> > > > news:eAnXIlNIEHA.3240@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > > You keep adding pieces.
> > > > > If your application does not leak interface pointers if compiled
as
> > > > console
> > > > > and run from your account,
> > > > > but maybe it does when it's a serivce (run by localsystem ?)
> > > > > then you should go after the differences in COM initialization,
> > account
> > > > and
> > > > > DCOM permission.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers
no
> > > > rights.
> > > > > Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms
> specified
> > at
> > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Levi Wilson" <lewilson@purdue.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > news:#o6nTWMIEHA.828@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > Sorry, I wasn't descriptive enough...the #define CONSOLE_APP is
> just
> > a
> > > > > > custom define statement in my code so that when it is defined,
it
> > > > compiles
> > > > > > my program as a console app (how it originated before I changed
it
> > to
> > > be
> > > > a
> > > > > > windows service), but if it's not defined it compiles it as a
> > windows
> > > > > > service.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Example:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > void main()
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > #ifdef CONSOLE_SERVICE
> > > > > >  ServiceInitialization(0,NULL,NULL);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  cout << "Type '@' to quit:  " << endl;
> > > > > >  char ch;
> > > > > >  cin >> ch;
> > > > > >  while(ch!='@')
> > > > > >  {
> > > > > >   cin >> ch;
> > > > > >  }
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  SetEvent(g_hQuit);
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  WaitForSingleObject(g_hThread,INFINITE);
> > > > > > #else
> > > > > >   SERVICE_TABLE_ENTRY DispatchTable[] = {
> > > > > >                                           {"MyService",
> > > MyServiceStart},
> > > > > >                                           {NULL, NULL}
> > > > > >                                         };
> > > > > >   if(!StartServiceCtrlDispatcher(DispatchTable))
> > > > > >   {
> > > > > >     SvcDebugOut(" [MY_SERVICE] StartSvcCtrlDispatcher error =
> %d\n",
> > > > > > GetLastError());
> > > > > >   }
> > > > > > #endif
> > > > > > }
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All my ServiceInitialization() function does is creates the
thread
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > > > events that my program waits for...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > See what I mean?  I still use the exact same initialization, it
> just
> > > > > changes
> > > > > > how it starts up...well, and also that it runs under
Explorer.exe
> > > rather
> > > > > > than svchost.exe or whatever.  Any ideas?  Thanks again for your
> > quick
> > > > > > response...fastest I've ever experienced in a news group, nice
> work!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT]" <ivanbrug@online.microsoft.com> wrote in
> > > message
> > > > > > news:u7rfgNMIEHA.3276@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > I'm not familair with the #define CONSOLE_APP pre-processor
> > setting,
> > > > > > > (which development environment does it apply to ?
> > > > > > > what does it change in linker settings ?
> > > > > > > what does it change in OLE32 initialization settings ?).
> > > > > > > It looks like a cros-apartment problem caused by different COM
> > > > > > > initialization settings.
> > > > > > > This may cause un-necessary cross-apartment marshaling,
> > > > > > > and extra "mediators" interface pointers to be kept around.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
confers
> > no
> > > > > > rights.
> > > > > > > Use of any included script samples are subject to the terms
> > > specified
> > > > at
> > > > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Levi Wilson" <lewilson@purdue.edu> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:uSlnsuLIEHA.2836@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > Ivan, thank you very much for your quick response.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > my interface pointers to these classes (IWbemServices,
> > > > > > > IEnumWbemClassObject,
> > > > > > > > etc.) reside in classes for the different types of
information
> > > that
> > > > I
> > > > > > want
> > > > > > > > to gather, all with a generic base class that has the
methods
> to
> > > > > > enumerate
> > > > > > > > and gather the information that I want.  The interface
> pointers
> > > are
> > > > > > > released
> > > > > > > > accordingly in these classes, and i've checked all of this
> with
> > > > debug
> > > > > > > > strings etc.  Another funny thing that I REALLY don't
> understand
> > > is
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > when I #define CONSOLE_APP in my application to make it a
> > console
> > > > app
> > > > > > > > (instead of starting the dispatch table, etc. it just spawns
> my
> > > > worker
> > > > > > > > thread) everything seems to work fine.  I don't see a large
> > > increase
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > > either.  Anyone have any clues on as to why this is
happening?
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > again, for any information that you can provide.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Ivan Brugiolo [MSFT]" <ivanbrug@online.microsoft.com> wrote
> in
> > > > > message
> > > > > > > > news:eSiIfULIEHA.2164@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > > > > > > Summary counters like "Virtual Memory" and "Handles" are
way
> > too
> > > > > borad
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > give anything actionable. RPC connection across machines
are
> > > > "seen"
> > > > > by
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > programmers
> > > > > > > > > are interface pointers, like IWbemServices,
> > > IEnumWbemClassObject,
> > > > > > > > > that are given back to the programmer.
> > > > > > > > > The responsability to close them is normally up to the
> > > programmer,
> > > > > > > > > by releasing the interface pointers when expected.
> > > > > > > > > On average RPCSS is able to engage a garbage collection of
> > IPIDs
> > > > > > > > > on your process (for example, when the remote client dies
> and
> > > you
> > > > > are
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > server,
> > > > > > > > > RPCSS will reclaim the stub resources minutes after the
> client
> > > > death
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > detected).
> > > > > > > > > If you are using the scripting interfaces, this is further
> > > > > complicated
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > the wbemdisp layer
> > > > > > > > > and the scripting engine.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > > > This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and
> > confers
> > > > no
> > > > > > > > rights.
> > > > > > > > > Use of any included script samples are subject to the
terms
> > > > > specified
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > > http://www.microsoft.com/info/cpyright.htm
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Levi Wilson" <lewilson@direcway.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > news:b8119366.0404120915.6281db83@posting.google.com...
> > > > > > > > > > i have a windows service that runs on a windows 2000
> server
> > > > (sp3).
> > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > > > basically has a list of computers that I want to obtain
> some
> > > > > > > > > > information from periodically. when running, I observe
the
> > > > process
> > > > > > > > > > with SysInternals process explorer and see that the
> handles
> > > > count
> > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > well as the Virtual memory size seems to increase every
> time
> > i
> > > > > check
> > > > > > > > > > the information on a PC.  This seems to only happen on
> > Windows
> > > > > 2000
> > > > > > > > > > server.  Has anyone experienced anything similar to
this?
> I
> > > > > forgot
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > mention, that when I look in process explorer, 90% of
the
> > > > handles
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > are open seem to either be file handles with the
following
> > > > names:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > \device\tcp
> > > > > > > > > > \device\afd\endpoint
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is WMI not closing the RPC handles it opens when it
> gathers
> > > > remote
> > > > > > > > > > information from the computers?  What is happening?  Any
> > help
> > > is
> > > > > > > > > > greatly appreciated, and please let me know if more
> > > information
> > > > > > needs
> > > > > > > > > > to be provided.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Levi
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Relevant Pages
Loading