Re: SBS 2003 Premium R2 server becomes more unstable, page file gr

Dave,

Thanks for the reply. In the task manager, the Mem Useage doesn't account
for much. The VM Size is what seems to be getting large (Mem Useage vs. VM
Size included below)! I didn't note the Commit Charge at the time that I had
taken that data and I deleted my screen shot after building the spread***,
but right now we're looking at a PF size of 9.34 GB with a Commit Charge of
9571M / 9749M.

I spoke to Microsoft again today about the hotfixes that you suggested, and
unlike before, they had a replacement for the hotfix from article 916089.
The new article is 927891. It didn't look like it was really all that
similar and I won't apply it until this evening, but this is what Microsoft
said was the fix.

Any other thoughts? The wuauserv is still part of the svchost which seems
to be rather large on the VM size. Could this still be the culprit to this
memory leak? I'll see if the server crashes today. When the PF gets up
around 9.4 GB it gets really unstable.

Image Name Mem Usage (K) VM Size (K)
store.exe 609,584 623,068
svchost.exe 62,188 605,276
wspsrv.exe 27,120 596,512
w3wp.exe 34,508 591,664
lsass.exe 41,296 589,908
inetinfo.exe 33,392 584,112
mad.exe 21,856 570,804
winlogon.exe 3,904 567,600
services.exe 97,904 560,292
ntfrs.exe 1,852 560,028
sqlservr.exe 547,040 558,156
sqlagent.EXE 3,100 552,880
dfssvc.exe 4,744 552,792
crss.exe 3,096 550,936
tbsrvc.exe 2,764 550,496
sqlservr.exe 253,864 262,940
w3wp.exe 76,612 77,544
sqlservr.exe 39,820 50,524
mmc.exe 28,800 26,864
hpsmhd.exe 16,740 15,736
explorer.exe 20,052 13,664
wmiprvse.exe 14,932 13,052
exmgmt.exe 10,420 11,076
dns.exe 6,824 10,760
mspdmin.exe 13,836 10,252
explorer.exe 14,248 10,216
mssearch.exe 1,368 9,728
OWSTIMER.EXE 10,584 8,564
hpsmhd.exe 10,732 8,332
svchost.exe 8,456 8,272
ismserv.exe 7,096 7,364
wins.exe 6,192 7,340
wmiprvse.exe 9,884 6,676
winlogon.exe 2,600 5,864
svchost.exe 4,912 5,312
svchost.exe 6,444 4,788
spoolsv.exe 5,088 4,500
W3Prefch.exe 5,968 3,744
llssrv.exe 5,288 3,648
dmadmin.exe 4,512 3,544
svchost.exe 4,608 3,448
svchost.exe 3,864 3,376
msdtc.exe 4,268 2,208
sqlmangr.exe 5,136 2,096
sqlmangr.exe 5,220 2,084
smhstart.exe 3,120 2,040
crss.exe 4,560 1,924
isastg.exe 3,812 1,776
sbscrexe.exe 4,336 1,572
taskmgr.exe 4,356 1,560
tcpsvcs.exe 2,128 1,440
svchost.exe 3,596 1,424
sqlwriter.exe 3,604 1,268


"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" wrote:

So at the time you got the information below, the system was showing 9 GB PF
Usage? Those figures only add up to a little under 2 GB for memory usage,
and even peak is only a little over 2. What figures are you showing under
Commit Charge on the Performance tab?


"ipadl" <ipadl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:B677EFD4-B9E5-4DB3-B280-729D1C338FAD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Les et al,

We've applied those patches and it seems as though the page file is
continuing to do it's old thing. It is growing to approximately 9 GB (out
of
10GB that we have set aside) and sometimes growing larger, choking other
applications. SQL has been limited to 512KB. Are there any other ideas
as
to how to diagnose this problem? I'm going to try to insert a spread***
into this post with a bunch of Processes that my help us find a problem.
If
there is a better way to do this, let me know. Thanks in advance for your
help.

Image Name PID Username Session ID CPU Mem Usage (K) Peak Mem Usage (K)
Mem
Delta (K) VM Size (K) Paged Pool (K)
store.exe 3620 SYSTEM 0 00 609,584 627,276 0 623,068 122
svchost.exe 928 SYSTEM 0 00 62,188 116,240 0 605,276 131
wspsrv.exe 5428 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 27,120 39,512 0 596,512 206
w3wp.exe 7964 SYSTEM 0 00 34,508 34,896 0 591,664 74
lsass.exe 476 SYSTEM 0 00 41,296 43,724 0 589,908 181
inetinfo.exe 1656 SYSTEM 0 00 33,392 33,440 0 584,112 144
mad.exe 3072 SYSTEM 0 00 21,856 24,320 0 570,804 89
winlogon.exe 416 SYSTEM 0 00 3,904 23,880 0 567,600 59
services.exe 464 SYSTEM 0 00 97,904 97,904 0 560,292 127
ntfrs.exe 2312 SYSTEM 0 00 1,852 8,372 0 560,028 31
sqlservr.exe 1844 SYSTEM 0 00 547,040 547,256 0 558,156 54
sqlagent.EXE 2580 SYSTEM 0 00 3,100 6,100 0 552,880 34
dfssvc.exe 1480 SYSTEM 0 00 4,744 4,844 0 552,792 33
crss.exe 6796 SYSTEM 0 00 3,096 3,124 0 550,936 29
tbsrvc.exe 2840 SYSTEM 0 00 2,764 3,036 0 550,496 24
sqlservr.exe 1916 SYSTEM 0 00 253,864 253,992 0 262,940 49
w3wp.exe 1336 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 76,612 76,744 0 77,544 93
sqlservr.exe 1944 SYSTEM 0 00 39,820 39,836 0 50,524 40
mmc.exe 6616 Nomadserv 0 00 28,800 28,800 0 26,864 109
hpsmhd.exe 3800 SYSTEM 0 00 16,740 16,748 0 15,736 44
explorer.exe 7708 Nomadserv 0 00 20,052 20,420 0 13,664 77
wmiprvse.exe 4944 SYSTEM 0 00 14,932 15,100 0 13,052 58
exmgmt.exe 2952 SYSTEM 0 00 10,420 11,176 0 11,076 44
dns.exe 1500 SYSTEM 0 00 6,824 6,836 0 10,760 40
mspdmin.exe 3456 SYSTEM 0 00 13,836 13,976 0 10,252 64
explorer.exe 436 Nomadserv 0 00 14,248 14,324 0 10,216 65
mssearch.exe 3100 SYSTEM 0 00 1,368 9,056 0 9,728 45
OWSTIMER.EXE 2564 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 10,584 10,628 0 8,564 43
hpsmhd.exe 3444 SYSTEM 0 00 10,732 10,740 0 8,332 36
svchost.exe 3180 SYSTEM 0 00 8,456 9,448 0 8,272 27
ismserv.exe 1732 SYSTEM 0 00 7,096 7,104 0 7,364 47
wins.exe 2868 SYSTEM 0 00 6,192 6,208 0 7,340 30
wmiprvse.exe 4748 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 9,884 12,244 0 6,676 40
winlogon.exe 6000 SYSTEM 0 00 2,600 8,348 0 5,864 47
svchost.exe 864 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 4,912 4,932 0 5,312 35
svchost.exe 900 LOCAL SERVICE 0 00 6,444 6,460 0 4,788 34
spoolsv.exe 1272 SYSTEM 0 00 5,088 5,096 0 4,500 24
W3Prefch.exe 5464 SYSTEM 0 00 5,968 5,980 0 3,744 43
llssrv.exe 1764 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 5,288 6,220 0 3,648 31
dmadmin.exe 5856 SYSTEM 0 00 4,512 4,520 0 3,544 25
svchost.exe 5792 SYSTEM 0 00 4,608 4,612 0 3,448 33
svchost.exe 2824 SYSTEM 0 00 3,864 3,920 0 3,376 31
msdtc.exe 1300 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 4,268 4,296 0 2,208 22
sqlmangr.exe 3724 Nomadserv 0 00 5,136 6,636 0 2,096 39
sqlmangr.exe 7792 Nomadserv 0 00 5,220 6,676 0 2,084 39
smhstart.exe 2776 SYSTEM 0 00 3,120 3,128 0 2,040 17
crss.exe 392 SYSTEM 0 00 4,560 4,616 0 1,924 68
isastg.exe 1696 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 3,812 3,824 0 1,776 30
sbscrexe.exe 2424 SYSTEM 0 00 4,336 4,560 0 1,572 31
taskmgr.exe 3576 Nomadserv 0 00 4,356 4,356 0 1,560 33
tcpsvcs.exe 2480 SYSTEM 0 00 2,128 2,136 0 1,440 17
svchost.exe 804 NETWORK SERVICE 0 00 3,596 3,608 0 1,424 24
sqlwriter.exe 2716 SYSTEM 0 00 3,604 3,612 0 1,268 22


"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" wrote:

Dave provided the link in his post.

FIX: When you run Windows Update to scan for updates that use Windows
Installer, including Office updates, CPU utilization may reach 100
percent
for prolonged periods
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/916089/en-us

This fixes the svchost.exe issue, even though the description addresses
another symptom.

--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"Dirk-Thomas Brown" <Youhadtoask@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:FE312A0A-4CD4-4931-8E80-EB5E74DA0CE7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Can you clarify as to the hot fix you are referring to please?

Dirk-Thomas

"Les Connor [SBS MVP]" <les.connor@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:B308EFC6-0B93-4024-999F-B2AF4C64A493@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
These are classic symptoms, in fact I've not seen an SBS network that
hasn't been affected.

Get the most recent fix, which includes msi.dll. In every case, this
hotfix has resolved the issue for me.

--
Les Connor [SBS MVP]


"ipadl" <sethschmautz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1173456301.131038.72340@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dave,

Thanks for the ideas. Under that particular PID I have the
following:

AeLookupSvc, Browser, CryptSvc, dmserver, EventSystem, helpsvc, IAS,
lanmanserver, lanmanworkstation, Netman, Nla, RasMan, RemoteAccess,
Schedule, seclogon, SENS, ShellHWDetection, winmgmt, wuauserv

It seems as though the first MS solution met our symptoms more than
the second. The first described a situation where the update
services
would continue to use up memory until the system became unstable.
The
second described a situation where the CPU useage stayed at 100% for
long periods of time. In our case, we're seeing a growing page file,
but we rarely see the CPU aboe 25%. Most of the time it's more like
2-6% useage with an occaisional jump above this if processes are
running on the server. Any thoughts? Does this seem to fit the mold
of the first MS solution or the second? Thanks again for your help,
I
didn't receive a notification that you had replied or I would have
answered sooner. Thanks,

Seth







.

Loading