Running out of memory - but I'm sure I have enough

[Guest]

I have 1.12G of RAM plus 1G (min) of page file (pagefile.sys). However, my
computer seems to run out of memory after about 1G. It starts
malfunctioning, and PF Usage/Commit Charge never goes above 1.1G. It doesn't
seem to be using the page file.

The malfunctioning includes: programs not starting up, various memory errors
when programs are running, and various weird malfunctions (e.g. right-click
stops working). When I close other programs (and free up memory), the
problems go away, but then restart once I hit the 1.1G limit again. Other
than that, there are no other errors or error message, as far as I know, but
I'm not sure where I'd look to find them.

Commit Charge:

Total - 1G
Limit - 2G
Peak - 1G

Physical memory:

Total 1.12G
Avail 320M
System Cache 440M

Disk Drive:

38G total
7.7G free
6G System Volume Information
NTFS - not partitioned

I tried recreating my pagefile.sys (by turning it off, rebooting, then
turning it back on), and I tried defrag. Sometimes it seems to work for a
while (PF usage gets up to 1.5G), but then it stops working and won't go
above 1G anymore. I could just buy more RAM, I guess, but I'd prefer to get
this working.

I'm running Dell Dimension 4600. XP Home SP2.

 

[Mak]

molim,
that sounds like you either have leaking application(s) or infected with
something. (do virus / spyware scan, post results)
What process(es) has(have) the highest contribution to commit charge when
errors start showing? VM Size column in TM.
(In Task Manager / Processes / View / Select Columns / tick Virtual Memory
Size, sort by that column.)

When you re-boot your computer what is your initial commit charge? If you
close only application(s) (see above) with high VM size, does system wide
commit charge go down? If so, by how much?

 

[Gerry Cornell]

Molim

The system allocates blocks of virtual memory to applications (
programmes ).
These allocations are described as size. Virtual memory usage is not the
same. Thus an application may have an allocation reservation ) but never
use any virtual memory.

You may check on pagefile (virtual memory) usage with Page File Monitor for
XP:
http://www.dougknox.com/

If you get anything much more than 20 / 30 mb virtual memory usage you
need to add RAM memory. The system uses virtual memory for a
limited number of tasks rather than RAM memory.

Make sure you study the readme.txt file carefully to ensure you get the
utility to work as it should.

Have you installed any "memory boosters" ?

What are your antispyware arrangements?

Task Manager is useful but you could look at another freeware utility
Process Explorer, which provides similar information but adds that
little bit extra towards seeing what the running processes represent.

For further information about Process Explorer see here:
http://www.sysinternals.com/ntw2k/freeware/procexp.shtml

To ascertain which service is causing the problem select the
svchost producing the high CPU usage, right click,
select Properties, Services. Note there are the full names and some
explanation of what each service does.

You will find further information on Services here:
http://majorgeeks.com/page.php?id=12

To trace the particular Service involved you need to turn off each
service in turn and then restore it noting what effect it has on CPU
usage. However, you need to take care and watch what other Services are
dependent on that service. When you click on the Dependencies tab allow
it a little time to display the information.


--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Guest]

Thanks for the Page File Monitor tip. According to XP Page File monitor:

12/30/2005 5:57:07 PM
Pagefile Physical Location: C:\pagefile.sys
Current Pagefile Usage: 110 MB
Session Peak Usage: 118 MB
Current Pagefile Size: 1700 MB

However, according to Task Manager, PF Usage is: 1.06 GB (measured at
exactly the same time).

So who is correct? Is my PF Usage 118MB or 1.06GB?

Also, why do you say I need to add more RAM if my PF Usage is above 30 MB?
I Have a PF Size of 1700MB (with 1GB RAM).

I have not installed any memory boosters. I have Web Root Spy Sweeper, and
it has never detected anything on my system.

 

[Gerry Cornell]

Molim

Task Manager does not record pagefile usage. According to the information
you have provided your usage has peaked at 118 mb.

The figure of 30 mb is an indicator not a precise figure. Maybe the figure
should be higher. The point is that some pagefile usage by the system is
inevitable and therefore where usage is small adding memory will not
eliminate the usage.

Your figure indicates a situation that may be worth monitoring over a period
of time to get a grasp of what your average usage is? Also what programmes
/ applications cause this figure to be much higher at times?

A typical Windows XP home user probably has 512 mb of RAM memory.
You already have double that amount. However, whilst 512 mb may be
suitable for a typical user it is not a case of one size fits all. Some
applications require a lot more RAM memory. What programmes are
you using requiring more memory?

You might start by listing the top 8 applications in terms of Peak Memory
Usage on the Processes tab in Task Manager. If you cannot see a column
for Peak Memory Usage then select View, Select Columns and check the
relevant box.

It is possible you have a programme leaking memory. How often is the
computer rebooted or shutdown? If always on a leaking memory problem
will become an ever increasing problem.

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Guest]

Task Manager records page file usage. The following is taken *verbatim* from
the Help section of Task Manager:

"PF Usage

The amount of paging file being used by the system. If your computer is
running near the maximum, you can increase the page file size."

So it's still a mystery to me why TM and XP Page File Monitor give such
different results.

Anyway, I'm a computer programmer. I run a lot of programs. I use IDE's,
cygwin, various tools. The memory usage quickly goes up to 1GB. That's not
the problem. The problem is that my computer starts to malfunction when I
get up to 1GB, even though I have a page file of 1.7GB. By "malfunction" I
mean the following:

Programs not starting up, various memory errors when programs are running,
and various weird malfunctions (e.g. right-click stops working). When I
close other programs (and free up memory), the problems go away, but then
restart once I hit the 1G limit again.

It's as if my computer is not using the page file. I should have 2.7G
available, but my computer is only using up to 1G, although sometimes it
seems to be able to go over that limit temporarily before it starts to
malfunction.

 

[Gerry Cornell]

Molim

I cannot find your quote from the Help Section of Task Manager. Have you
taken it from a pre-Windows XP Help? Are you looking at Home Edition or
Professional?

Bill James MS MVP has a convenient tool, 'WinXP-2K_Pagefile', for
monitoring the actual usage of the Page file, which can be downloaded
here. A compiled Visual Basic version is available from Doug Knox's
site which may be more convenient for some users. The value seen
for 'Peak Usage' over several days makes a good guide for setting
the Initial size economically.

Note that these aspects of Windows XP have changed significantly
from earlier Windows NT versions, and practices that have been common
there may no longer be appropriate. Also, the 'PF Usage' (Page File in
Use) measurement in Task Manager | Performance for 'Page File in Use'
include those potential uses by pages that have not been taken up.
It makes a good indicator of the adequacy of the 'Maximum' size
setting, but not for the 'Initial' one, let alone for any need for more RAM.

Source: http://aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm

The pagefile usage represents how much memory is set aside for the
process in the system paging file.

Source: http://snipurl.com/l6vh

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Guest]

Hi Mak,

I'm a software developer and I run a lot of programs, so it's not surprising
that my memory usage goes up. The problem is that I have a page file of 1.7G
- 2.5G, and I would think that should be high enough for my needs (total
2.7G). I'm not getting any error messages, just various malfunctions as
described below. Furthermore, monitoring of my page file indicates that it
is not being fully utilized, e.g. XP Page file monitor:

12/31/2005 6:18:25 PM
Pagefile Physical Location: C:\pagefile.sys
Current Pagefile Usage: 199 MB
Session Peak Usage: 251 MB
Current Pagefile Size: 1700 MB

Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. I think I can solve the problem
by buying more memory, but still I'd like to understand why my page file
isn't working properly.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[Guest]

Hi Gerry,

I'm quoting from TM XP Home SP2. It says exactly the same thing in the
on-line documentation:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/...-us/taskman_monitor_perf_fields_overview.mspx

And says the same thing everywhere else I looked.

What kind of system are you running?

Thanks,
Matt

 

[David Candy]

TM doesn't measure pagefile but all paging files, that is all DLLs and EXEs that are loaded. Open more programs and more VM appears. Have no pagefile and watch the amount in use climb as you open more programs.

 

[Gerry Cornell]

Matt

Your quote is ambiguous and almost certainly written in 2001. It has most
likely
never been amended or updated, Alex Nichol was an acknowledged expert on
virtual memory and his Article was revised several times to reflect changes.
The last revision is dated February 2005.

Why do you think Bill James wrote his utility? It was because none of the
Microsoft
tools provided this information.

You will find few, if any, to support your interpretation.

..I am using Home Edition with all updates.

Unfortunately not all Microsoft documentation is 100% accurate. Every now
and
again one comes across inaccurate or misleading statements. The one you
quote is one of them!

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Mak]

Hi Molim,

let me try to explain few things first.

Paging file is a backup storage for virtual private writable address space.
Only.
Other stuff is backed up by the original files - exe, dll, dat, and so on.
When Windows needs to page stuff in and out of RAM due to pressure - high
hard page fault rate of one or more of your applications, modified stuff
(virtual private address space) goes to paging file, code goes to where it
came from - exe, dll and so on (it's actually more complicated than that,
code doesn't have to be written back to original file, it's gets dropped out
of RAM and goes to standby page list, but for the sake of simplicity let's
say it gets paged back to the original file)

So, you can't just add more space to paging file to make more memory - you
only affect high water mark (commit limit) for system wide virtual private
address space.

System wide, the sum of virtual private address space of all processes
(including system) is called commit charge.

Task Manager for some reason (to confuse you, I think) likes to call
things... let's say differently.
The graph "PF usage" and "PF usage history" are nothing more than commit
usage and commit usage history respectively. It is not paging file usage, no
matter what TM help says (You _won't_ find correct information on Virtual
memory / paging file and all that on Microsoft site either, for the
exception perhaps of MSDN). In Win2k for example, Task Manager uses "Mem
usage" and "Mem usage history" for those two graphs - it isn't correct in
Win2k and it isn't any better in XP. (Process Explorer from sysinternals,
has correct labels for the above two graphs).

Task Manager has no way of showing paging file usage.

Task Manager also calls stuff in processes tab *differently*.
"Mem usage" is actually process' working set and "VM size" is virtual
private address space.

Page file monitoring tool that you downloaded, shows (hopefully) the correct
paging file usage.
However, there is a built-in, probably the best Windows monitoring tool that
will show you paging file usage and much more - Perfmon.

Perfmon | paging file | %usage | _total - will give you your paging file
usage.

You can for example also see this for process (firefox process in this
example):
Perfmon Task Manager value

private bytes VM size 10,380 K (~10.14MB)
working set mem usage 18,884 K (~18.44MB)
virtual bytes can't show 61,972 K (~60.52MB)

Your computer has high commit charge (let's call things what they are for a
change) when you experience problems - I think, it can be due to memory
leaking in one (or more) of your applications. So, read my original reply
and see what you can find.

 

[deebs]

Thanks for the Page File Monitor tip. According to XP Page File monitor:

12/30/2005 5:57:07 PM
Pagefile Physical Location: C:\pagefile.sys
Current Pagefile Usage: 110 MB
Session Peak Usage: 118 MB
Current Pagefile Size: 1700 MB

However, according to Task Manager, PF Usage is: 1.06 GB (measured at
exactly the same time).

So who is correct? Is my PF Usage 118MB or 1.06GB?

Also, why do you say I need to add more RAM if my PF Usage is above 30 MB?
I Have a PF Size of 1700MB (with 1GB RAM).

I have not installed any memory boosters. I have Web Root Spy Sweeper, and
it has never detected anything on my system.

:

Good questions but I wonder if the quest for documentation helps?

How many disk drives (as in separate platters rather than partitions)
are on your computer?

The reason I ask is that created supplemental page files on separate
platters does seem to make for a swifter system.

 

[Gerry Cornell]

deebs

Your statement runs contrary to the conventional wisdom on this
subject. The counter argument is that the overhead created as
a result of setting up extra page files negates any benefit gained.

It is difficult to evaluate objectively from a general user point of
view claim and counter claim. However, the consensus of "expert"
opinion is against you on this one.

In practice because using virtual memory is slower than RAM
memory adding RAM memory to the point where the use of virtual
memory is minimised is the more effective route to achieving
improved system performance.

--

Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Guest]

Hi Mak,

Thanks for the explanation. I understand it a little better, although I
don't see how it could be a memory leak if my commit charge won't go above
(as of now) 750MB when I have available 2700MB (1G RAM + 1.7G PF). If I try
to start up more programs, it just fails.

Anyway, you asked for virus/spyware scan and VM Size column in TM. So here
it is:

I use Norton AV and Web Root Spy Sweeper, both up to date. Neither has ever
reported any problems:

Spy Sweeper:

9:48 PM: | Start of Session, Saturday, December 31, 2005 |
9:48 PM: Spy Sweeper started
9:48 PM: Sweep initiated using definitions version 594
9:48 PM: Starting Memory Sweep
9:55 PM: Memory Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:07:00
9:55 PM: Starting Registry Sweep
9:56 PM: Registry Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time:00:00:47
9:56 PM: Starting Cookie Sweep
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: 247realmedia cookie
9:56 PM: matt@247realmedia[1].txt (ID = 1953)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: 2o7.net cookie
9:56 PM: matt@2o7[1].txt (ID = 1957)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: adknowledge cookie
9:56 PM: matt@adknowledge[1].txt (ID = 2072)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: apmebf cookie
9:56 PM: matt@apmebf[1].txt (ID = 2229)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: bravenet cookie
9:56 PM: matt@bravenet[2].txt (ID = 2322)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: burstnet cookie
9:56 PM: matt@burstnet[2].txt (ID = 2336)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: ccbill cookie
9:56 PM: matt@ccbill[1].txt (ID = 2369)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: ru4 cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)4[2].txt (ID = 3269)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: overture cookie
9:56 PM: matt@overture[1].txt (ID = 3105)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: pro-market cookie
9:56 PM: matt@pro-market[1].txt (ID = 3197)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: questionmarket cookie
9:56 PM: matt@questionmarket[1].txt (ID = 3217)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: realmedia cookie
9:56 PM: matt@realmedia[2].txt (ID = 3235)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: server.iad.liveperson cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3341)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: statcounter cookie
9:56 PM: matt@statcounter[2].txt (ID = 3447)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: tracking cookie
9:56 PM: matt@tracking[2].txt (ID = 3571)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: tribalfusion cookie
9:56 PM: matt@tribalfusion[1].txt (ID = 3589)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: seeq cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3332)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: zedo cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3763)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: adserver cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 2142)
9:56 PM: matt@zedo[1].txt (ID = 3762)
9:56 PM: Cookie Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:00:06
9:56 PM: Starting File Sweep
10:55 PM: File Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:58:36
10:55 PM: Full Sweep has completed. Elapsed time 01:06:34
10:55 PM: Traces Found: 20
11:38 AM: Automatic removal of old quarantine items in progress.
11:39 AM: Quarantine item removal complete.
5:20 PM: Removal process initiated
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: 247realmedia cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: 2o7.net cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: adknowledge cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: adserver cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: apmebf cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: bravenet cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: burstnet cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: ccbill cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: overture cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: pro-market cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: questionmarket cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: realmedia cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: ru4 cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: seeq cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: server.iad.liveperson cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: statcounter cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: tracking cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: tribalfusion cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: zedo cookie
5:21 PM: Removal process completed. Elapsed time 00:00:09
9:34 PM: Processing Startup Alerts
9:34 PM: Allowed Startup entry: iTunesHelper
9:36 PM: Processing Startup Alerts
9:36 PM: Allowed Startup entry: QuickTime Task
1:30 PM: The Spy Communication shield has blocked access to: www.whenu.com
1:30 PM: The Spy Communication shield has blocked access to: www.whenu.com
5:22 PM: Your spyware definitions have been updated.
12:09 AM: BHO Shield: found: ssv.dll-- BHO installation allowed at user
request
12:09 AM: Processing Startup Alerts
12:09 AM: Allowed Startup entry: SunJavaUpdateSched
12:40 AM: Memory Shield is not activated
12:40 AM: Spy Installation Shield is not activated

Norton AV from 1/1/06:

Scan results:MBRs scannned : 1
Master boot records infected : 0
Master boot records repaired : 0
Boot Records scanned : 1
Boot records infected : 0
Boot records repaired : 0
Files scanned : 1019020
Threats detected : 0
Files repaired : 0
Files quarantined : 0
Files deleted : 0
Files excluded : 0

And as for TM, the VM Column is:

Web Root Spy Sweeper: 35M
Explorer.exe - 30MB
sqlsrvr - 34MB
iexplorer - 24MB
(remainder under 20MB)

I closed spy sweeper, and it resulted in the Commit Charge going down by the
same amount. The other programs I didn't close because there is no interface
to close them from. I didn't close iexplorer because I'm using it.

My initial commit charge is around 500MB after a reboot. Then it goes up to
1.2 G as I start up more programs, then the malfunctioning starts (unable to
open programs, etc), then the commit charge goes down to 1G. Now it's at
750MB and I am unable to start up more programs. My current PF usage is
270MB (according to Norton System Monitor, which I believe is correct).

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[Guest]

Gerry,

Very confusing. The MS documentation is incorrect. Thanks for the
explanation.

Anyway, my commit charge is around 750MB, PF Usage around 270MB. My
computer is malfunctioning (programs not starting up, etc). But I think I
have enough memory: 1G RAM + 1.7GB PF.

Matt

 

[Gerry Cornell]

Matt

In another reply you mention Norton and thereby introduce another possible
factor. Are you using any Norton Utilities, other than Norton Anti-Virus. If
you
have a Norton Protected Storage file that can cause misunderstandings
regarding available free disk space, which may in turn impact on space
available for allocation to virtual memory.
http://snipurl.com/j8g4

--

Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England

Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Mak]

Matt,

ok, can you tell me something - are you running with LargeSystemCache set to
1?
if you don't know, can you run this (note: it's single line) from start -
run, then post contents of memreg.txt here (you can cut prefetch and below
off):

reg export "hklm\system\currentcontrolset\control\session manager\memory
management" "%userprofile%\desktop\memreg.txt"

What TM reports as "available" under physical memory (performance tab) when
problem starts?
Also, if you now can add "mem usage" "np pool", "handle" and maybe "threats"
in TM processes (look at it after fresh reboot) and try to notice what
climes up to the top when you start having problems.
(you may want to do this in Process Explorer (sysinternals web site) - just
be aware, it leaks memory on .NET 1.1 - not much - you can update to ver 2
of .NET tho)
How long does it take BTW to halt your system? Can it be done on will, or
does it take some time (like couple of days, a week)?

One more thing, I probably wasn't very clear, I'm not really after your
antivirus / antispyware logs, I should have asked instead - how confident
are you that you are clean?
But, since you've posted.... can you restart your SQL service when the
problem starts and if possible, can you run without QuickTime for awhile?

Hi Mak,

Thanks for the explanation. I understand it a little better, although I
don't see how it could be a memory leak if my commit charge won't go above
(as of now) 750MB when I have available 2700MB (1G RAM + 1.7G PF). If I
try
to start up more programs, it just fails.

Anyway, you asked for virus/spyware scan and VM Size column in TM. So
here
it is:

I use Norton AV and Web Root Spy Sweeper, both up to date. Neither has
ever
reported any problems:

Spy Sweeper:

9:48 PM: | Start of Session, Saturday, December 31, 2005 |
9:48 PM: Spy Sweeper started
9:48 PM: Sweep initiated using definitions version 594
9:48 PM: Starting Memory Sweep
9:55 PM: Memory Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:07:00
9:55 PM: Starting Registry Sweep
9:56 PM: Registry Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time:00:00:47
9:56 PM: Starting Cookie Sweep
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: 247realmedia cookie
9:56 PM: matt@247realmedia[1].txt (ID = 1953)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: 2o7.net cookie
9:56 PM: matt@2o7[1].txt (ID = 1957)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: adknowledge cookie
9:56 PM: matt@adknowledge[1].txt (ID = 2072)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: apmebf cookie
9:56 PM: matt@apmebf[1].txt (ID = 2229)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: bravenet cookie
9:56 PM: matt@bravenet[2].txt (ID = 2322)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: burstnet cookie
9:56 PM: matt@burstnet[2].txt (ID = 2336)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: ccbill cookie
9:56 PM: matt@ccbill[1].txt (ID = 2369)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: ru4 cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)4[2].txt (ID = 3269)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: overture cookie
9:56 PM: matt@overture[1].txt (ID = 3105)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: pro-market cookie
9:56 PM: matt@pro-market[1].txt (ID = 3197)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: questionmarket cookie
9:56 PM: matt@questionmarket[1].txt (ID = 3217)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: realmedia cookie
9:56 PM: matt@realmedia[2].txt (ID = 3235)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: server.iad.liveperson cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3341)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: statcounter cookie
9:56 PM: matt@statcounter[2].txt (ID = 3447)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: tracking cookie
9:56 PM: matt@tracking[2].txt (ID = 3571)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: tribalfusion cookie
9:56 PM: matt@tribalfusion[1].txt (ID = 3589)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: seeq cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3332)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: zedo cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 3763)
9:56 PM: Found Spy Cookie: adserver cookie
9:56 PM: (e-mail address removed)[1].txt (ID = 2142)
9:56 PM: matt@zedo[1].txt (ID = 3762)
9:56 PM: Cookie Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:00:06
9:56 PM: Starting File Sweep
10:55 PM: File Sweep Complete, Elapsed Time: 00:58:36
10:55 PM: Full Sweep has completed. Elapsed time 01:06:34
10:55 PM: Traces Found: 20
11:38 AM: Automatic removal of old quarantine items in progress.
11:39 AM: Quarantine item removal complete.
5:20 PM: Removal process initiated
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: 247realmedia cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: 2o7.net cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: adknowledge cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: adserver cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: apmebf cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: bravenet cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: burstnet cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: ccbill cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: overture cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: pro-market cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: questionmarket cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: realmedia cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: ru4 cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: seeq cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: server.iad.liveperson cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: statcounter cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: tracking cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: tribalfusion cookie
5:21 PM: Quarantining All Traces: zedo cookie
5:21 PM: Removal process completed. Elapsed time 00:00:09
9:34 PM: Processing Startup Alerts
9:34 PM: Allowed Startup entry: iTunesHelper
9:36 PM: Processing Startup Alerts
9:36 PM: Allowed Startup entry: QuickTime Task
1:30 PM: The Spy Communication shield has blocked access to: www.whenu.com
1:30 PM: The Spy Communication shield has blocked access to: www.whenu.com
5:22 PM: Your spyware definitions have been updated.
12:09 AM: BHO Shield: found: ssv.dll-- BHO installation allowed at user
request
12:09 AM: Processing Startup Alerts
12:09 AM: Allowed Startup entry: SunJavaUpdateSched
12:40 AM: Memory Shield is not activated
12:40 AM: Spy Installation Shield is not activated

Norton AV from 1/1/06:

Scan results:MBRs scannned : 1
Master boot records infected : 0
Master boot records repaired : 0
Boot Records scanned : 1
Boot records infected : 0
Boot records repaired : 0
Files scanned : 1019020
Threats detected : 0
Files repaired : 0
Files quarantined : 0
Files deleted : 0
Files excluded : 0

And as for TM, the VM Column is:

Web Root Spy Sweeper: 35M
Explorer.exe - 30MB
sqlsrvr - 34MB
iexplorer - 24MB
(remainder under 20MB)

I closed spy sweeper, and it resulted in the Commit Charge going down by
the
same amount. The other programs I didn't close because there is no
interface
to close them from. I didn't close iexplorer because I'm using it.

My initial commit charge is around 500MB after a reboot. Then it goes up
to
1.2 G as I start up more programs, then the malfunctioning starts (unable
to
open programs, etc), then the commit charge goes down to 1G. Now it's at
750MB and I am unable to start up more programs. My current PF usage is
270MB (according to Norton System Monitor, which I believe is correct).

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Matt

Hi Mak,

I'm a software developer and I run a lot of programs, so it's not
surprising
that my memory usage goes up. The problem is that I have a page file of
1.7G
- 2.5G, and I would think that should be high enough for my needs (total
2.7G). I'm not getting any error messages, just various malfunctions as
described below. Furthermore, monitoring of my page file indicates that
it
is not being fully utilized, e.g. XP Page file monitor:

12/31/2005 6:18:25 PM
Pagefile Physical Location: C:\pagefile.sys
Current Pagefile Usage: 199 MB
Session Peak Usage: 251 MB
Current Pagefile Size: 1700 MB

Any thoughts you have would be appreciated. I think I can solve the
problem
by buying more memory, but still I'd like to understand why my page file
isn't working properly.

Thanks,
Matt

 

[ray_condo]

I too have had the slowness of the browser very recently. I narrowed it
down to SpySweeper. SpySweeper does NOT like the new ssv.dll file that
comes with the latest version of java (1.5.06). Java versions of 1.5.0#
did NOT install SSV.DLL. If I disable this BHO in IE and leave
SpySweeper up, all is fine. If I leave this BHO enabled and close
SpySweeper, all is fine. But if I have both enabled, ugh, it turns to
molasses. It also does not matter if I have told SpySweeper to allow
this BHO (ssv.dll). I have duplicated this on seven different machines
(from established XP & W2K to brand new installs) and the slowness
always starts with java 1.5.06 and SpySweeper.

If java 1.4.2.10 is installed and java 1.5.06 is removed, all is fine
as the ssv.dll file is no longer installed. There are numerous bugs in
java 1.5.06 ( like this one
http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=690552&tstart=0 ), so
you may want to uninstall it and install java 1.5.05, or install java
1.4.2.10, disable the ActiveX shield in SpySweeper (I wouldn't do
that), or disable SpySweeper from monitoring BHO's altogether and use
SpyBot for BHO's instead.

 

[Mak]

Thanks for that, ray.

It might be it for OP, although, I have my doubts as he doesn't have
'slowness of the browser' - but it's easy to test - stop using SpySweeper.
(I won't go to older java tho)