![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
![]() |
| |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| | A problem with using more than 50% of the memory under Vista SP2 I've been seeing problems with significant slowdowns on both of my Vista Home Premium SP2 machines lately whenever the amount of physical memory used, as reported by Windows Task Manager, gets much over 50% of the total present. I first saw this problem on my 64-bit machine with 8 GB, and therefore guessed that the problem was due to the 4 GB limit for a program running in 32-bit mode. However, I'm now seeing the same problem on my 32-bit machine with 2 GB, so I'd now guess something else. The Back Up Files program is now running on my 32-bit machine, with about 75 hard faults per second. Is that program using hard faults as part of its way of reading the files to back up, or does it have a problem with using memory efficiently? Neither my 32-bit machine nor my 64-bit machine has completed a backup successfully lately, regardless of whether it was a full backup or an incremental backup - something about a problem with the Windows Catalog Files. I notice that the autorun.wbcat file included in the top level of the last few backup sets has length zero bytes; is this normal? |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| | Re: A problem with using more than 50% of the memory under Vista SP2 "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:OjsHWekDKHA.5780@xxxxxx Quote: > I've been seeing problems with significant slowdowns on > both of my Vista Home Premium SP2 machines lately > whenever the amount of physical memory used, as reported > by Windows Task Manager, gets much over 50% of the > total present. I first saw this problem on my 64-bit machine > with 8 GB, and therefore guessed that the problem was > due to the 4 GB limit for a program running in 32-bit mode. > However, I'm now seeing the same problem on my 32-bit > machine with 2 GB, so I'd now guess something else. > > The Back Up Files program is now running on my 32-bit > machine, with about 75 hard faults per second. Is that > program using hard faults as part of its way of reading the > files to back up, or does it have a problem with using > memory efficiently? > > Neither my 32-bit machine nor my 64-bit machine has > completed a backup successfully lately, regardless of > whether it was a full backup or an incremental backup - > something about a problem with the Windows Catalog > Files. > > I notice that the autorun.wbcat file included in the top > level of the last few backup sets has length zero bytes; > is this normal? At lower levels in the last few backup sets, there, are many *.wbcat files long ehough to contain something - about one for each *.zip file. I've seen a number of faults in Microsoft Windows Search Filter Host lately on my 64-bit machine, with the times suggesting that they occured during the last backup run, but accidentally erased all of those error report files before sending them to Microsoft. The searches may also be in Windows Mail, where I've been doing a lot of searches lately in order to clean up my quite sizable collections of unread news messages after discovering that having many more than 50000 such messages in the same folder or subfolder is likely to both halt Windows Mail, and make it difficult to move the whole collection of messages over to Windows Live Mail without errors. Windows Task Manager does not seem to fully report where the physical memory is used. It's currently reporting about 400 MB assigned to various processes on my 32-bit machine, but with a total of about 63% of the 2 GB on that machine as in use. The programs could be having problems with the rather large total number of files on each machine - around 2,000,000 on the 64-bit machine, and 2,500,000 on the 32-bit machine; most of these files are probably *.nws messages of 20 KB or less, but I've found no way to collect so many messages into larger collections using fewer files and still leave the messages readable in Windows Mail. I've seen similar results in previous backups on my 64-bit machine - a significant slowdown when more than 4 GB of the 8 GB total physical memory is in use. Any idea how to get a more complete report on what the physical memory is being used for? Also, any idea how to get Back Up Files to do a full backup, except without including information about any previous backups in its Windows Catalog Files? I noticed that these problems started about the time the Update for Microsoft Search Enhancement Pack was installed on each machine, along with a few other updates. Any idea if this update has caused Vista SP2 to start reserving blocks of memory without keeping any record of what programs these blocks are assigned to, so that they can be freed when those programs finish running? Although reboots free the excess memory usage, I don't know any way to reboot in the middle of a backup, and then still complete that backup successfully. A number of other programs also slow down considerably when more than 50% of the physical memory is in use, including the avast! antivirus program and Windows Defender antispyware program on the 32-bit machine, and the Norton Internet Security 2009 antivirus program on the 64-bit machine. Robert Miles |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| | Re: A problem with using more than 50% of the memory under Vista SP2 "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:OYtv66kDKHA.4004@xxxxxx Quote: > "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:OjsHWekDKHA.5780@xxxxxx Quote: >> I've been seeing problems with significant slowdowns on >> both of my Vista Home Premium SP2 machines lately >> whenever the amount of physical memory used, as reported >> by Windows Task Manager, gets much over 50% of the >> total present. I first saw this problem on my 64-bit machine >> with 8 GB, and therefore guessed that the problem was >> due to the 4 GB limit for a program running in 32-bit mode. >> However, I'm now seeing the same problem on my 32-bit >> machine with 2 GB, so I'd now guess something else. >> >> The Back Up Files program is now running on my 32-bit >> machine, with about 75 hard faults per second. Is that >> program using hard faults as part of its way of reading the >> files to back up, or does it have a problem with using >> memory efficiently? >> >> Neither my 32-bit machine nor my 64-bit machine has >> completed a backup successfully lately, regardless of >> whether it was a full backup or an incremental backup - >> something about a problem with the Windows Catalog >> Files. >> >> I notice that the autorun.wbcat file included in the top >> level of the last few backup sets has length zero bytes; >> is this normal? > At lower levels in the last few backup sets, there, are > many *.wbcat files long ehough to contain something - > about one for each *.zip file. > > I've seen a number of faults in Microsoft Windows Search > Filter Host lately on my 64-bit machine, with the times > suggesting that they occured during the last backup run, > but accidentally erased all of those error report files before > sending them to Microsoft. The searches may also be in > Windows Mail, where I've been doing a lot of searches > lately in order to clean up my quite sizable collections of > unread news messages after discovering that having many > more than 50000 such messages in the same folder or > subfolder is likely to both halt Windows Mail, and make > it difficult to move the whole collection of messages > over to Windows Live Mail without errors. > > Windows Task Manager does not seem to fully report > where the physical memory is used. It's currently reporting > about 400 MB assigned to various processes on my 32-bit > machine, but with a total of about 63% of the 2 GB on that > machine as in use. > > The programs could be having problems with the rather > large total number of files on each machine - around > 2,000,000 on the 64-bit machine, and 2,500,000 on the > 32-bit machine; most of these files are probably *.nws > messages of 20 KB or less, but I've found no way to collect > so many messages into larger collections using fewer files > and still leave the messages readable in Windows Mail. > > I've seen similar results in previous backups on my 64-bit > machine - a significant slowdown when more than 4 GB > of the 8 GB total physical memory is in use. > > Any idea how to get a more complete report on what the > physical memory is being used for? > > Also, any idea how to get Back Up Files to do a full > backup, except without including information about any > previous backups in its Windows Catalog Files? > > I noticed that these problems started about the time the > Update for Microsoft Search Enhancement Pack was > installed on each machine, along with a few other updates. > Any idea if this update has caused Vista SP2 to start > reserving blocks of memory without keeping any record > of what programs these blocks are assigned to, so that > they can be freed when those programs finish running? > > Although reboots free the excess memory usage, I don't > know any way to reboot in the middle of a backup, and > then still complete that backup successfully. > > A number of other programs also slow down considerably > when more than 50% of the physical memory is in use, > including the avast! antivirus program and Windows > Defender antispyware program on the 32-bit machine, > and the Norton Internet Security 2009 antivirus program > on the 64-bit machine. > > Robert Miles > menu in the lower left corner to start a search for scannow, with Windows Task Manager already running on the screen. I used the Search Everywhere option. The result did NOT find a program by that name, only a few newsgroups messages mentioning it, before the search ended with an error message saying I needed to run scannow on something related to my Windows Mail database. I saw considerable rises and falls in my physical memory usage (perhaps 2 GB to 4 GB) while I did this. Repeating that now doesn't repeat the problem - perhaps a slower part of the search system has caught up and saved the results. Robert Miles |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| | Re: A problem with using more than 50% of the memory under Vista SP2 "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:uLB5RHuEKHA.3480@xxxxxx Quote: > "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:OYtv66kDKHA.4004@xxxxxx Quote: >> "Robert Miles" <robertmiles@xxxxxx> wrote in message >> news:OjsHWekDKHA.5780@xxxxxx Quote: >>> I've been seeing problems with significant slowdowns on >>> both of my Vista Home Premium SP2 machines lately >>> whenever the amount of physical memory used, as reported >>> by Windows Task Manager, gets much over 50% of the >>> total present. I first saw this problem on my 64-bit machine >>> with 8 GB, and therefore guessed that the problem was >>> due to the 4 GB limit for a program running in 32-bit mode. >>> However, I'm now seeing the same problem on my 32-bit >>> machine with 2 GB, so I'd now guess something else. >>> >>> The Back Up Files program is now running on my 32-bit >>> machine, with about 75 hard faults per second. Is that >>> program using hard faults as part of its way of reading the >>> files to back up, or does it have a problem with using >>> memory efficiently? >>> >>> Neither my 32-bit machine nor my 64-bit machine has >>> completed a backup successfully lately, regardless of >>> whether it was a full backup or an incremental backup - >>> something about a problem with the Windows Catalog >>> Files. >>> >>> I notice that the autorun.wbcat file included in the top >>> level of the last few backup sets has length zero bytes; >>> is this normal? >> At lower levels in the last few backup sets, there, are >> many *.wbcat files long ehough to contain something - >> about one for each *.zip file. >> >> I've seen a number of faults in Microsoft Windows Search >> Filter Host lately on my 64-bit machine, with the times >> suggesting that they occured during the last backup run, >> but accidentally erased all of those error report files before >> sending them to Microsoft. The searches may also be in >> Windows Mail, where I've been doing a lot of searches >> lately in order to clean up my quite sizable collections of >> unread news messages after discovering that having many >> more than 50000 such messages in the same folder or >> subfolder is likely to both halt Windows Mail, and make >> it difficult to move the whole collection of messages >> over to Windows Live Mail without errors. >> >> Windows Task Manager does not seem to fully report >> where the physical memory is used. It's currently reporting >> about 400 MB assigned to various processes on my 32-bit >> machine, but with a total of about 63% of the 2 GB on that >> machine as in use. >> >> The programs could be having problems with the rather >> large total number of files on each machine - around >> 2,000,000 on the 64-bit machine, and 2,500,000 on the >> 32-bit machine; most of these files are probably *.nws >> messages of 20 KB or less, but I've found no way to collect >> so many messages into larger collections using fewer files >> and still leave the messages readable in Windows Mail. >> >> I've seen similar results in previous backups on my 64-bit >> machine - a significant slowdown when more than 4 GB >> of the 8 GB total physical memory is in use. >> >> Any idea how to get a more complete report on what the >> physical memory is being used for? >> >> Also, any idea how to get Back Up Files to do a full >> backup, except without including information about any >> previous backups in its Windows Catalog Files? >> >> I noticed that these problems started about the time the >> Update for Microsoft Search Enhancement Pack was >> installed on each machine, along with a few other updates. >> Any idea if this update has caused Vista SP2 to start >> reserving blocks of memory without keeping any record >> of what programs these blocks are assigned to, so that >> they can be freed when those programs finish running? >> >> Although reboots free the excess memory usage, I don't >> know any way to reboot in the middle of a backup, and >> then still complete that backup successfully. >> >> A number of other programs also slow down considerably >> when more than 50% of the physical memory is in use, >> including the avast! antivirus program and Windows >> Defender antispyware program on the 32-bit machine, >> and the Norton Internet Security 2009 antivirus program >> on the 64-bit machine. >> >> Robert Miles >> > menu in the lower left corner to start a search for scannow, > with Windows Task Manager already running on the screen. > I used the Search Everywhere option. > > The result did NOT find a program by that name, only a > few newsgroups messages mentioning it, before the search > ended with an error message saying I needed to run scannow > on something related to my Windows Mail database. I saw > considerable rises and falls in my physical memory usage > (perhaps 2 GB to 4 GB) while I did this. > > Repeating that now doesn't repeat the problem - perhaps > a slower part of the search system has caught up and saved > the results. > > Robert Miles > > > scannow is the switch to be used, as in "sfc /scannow" without the quotes. If the search is Windows Desktop Search 4.0, you can uninstall it and use something else for a search engine. I like to use Agent Ransack in Vista, and turn the Windows Search service off. SC Tom |
My System Specs![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Vista x64 Memory Problem | Vista General | |||
| Vista 64 BAD Memory Problem | Vista hardware & devices | |||
| Vista Memory Problem | Vista General | |||
| memory problem in Vista | Vista General | |||
| problem with memory (graphics shared memory) | Vista General | |||