Jump to content
Kernel Krumpet

618K Memory used as Process...

Recommended Posts

Seems to me the memory increases are related to something other than the update procedure, but again I'm speculating without knowing if there's something else going on behind the scenes.

+1

I think they're focusing on that because it was the main issue when they released 1.43. (an update bug in 1.42)

I don't think it's update-related either.

Something occurs which raises the memory usage, but it's not fully released thereafter.

It may shown up in the update process, but the problem is somewhere else methinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I guess I won't be able to test until I get home tonight. Tried reenabling it all on my home computer via remote desktop and I get Error Code 2. So I uninstalled, restarted, cleaned, restarted, installed, registered and clicked start protection and now I get error code 1073 and am unable to start the protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to start the testing now, but I'm curious why we're testing the update process only when my install is set to update at 1:00 AM and I have turned off automatic updates - and with all that turned off the memory rises anyways.

Seems to me the memory increases are related to something other than the update procedure, but again I'm speculating without knowing if there's something else going on behind the scenes.

Oddly updatedb.exe does stable this memory consumption for a time.

After those 7 hours of stability mbamservice.exe climbed again.

I ran updatedb.exe and now 2 hours later, the consumption is stable again. However i dont know how long.

Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oddly updatedb.exe does stable this memory consumption for a time.

After those 7 hours of stability mbamservice.exe climbed again.

I ran updatedb.exe and now 2 hours later, the consumption is stable again. However i dont know how long.

Marco

Well, the one thing that seems consistent in my case is that I'm getting a bit less than an hour of stability after running either the db update of the program, or the updatedb.exe. (52 -54 minutes...I've tried to actually be present to see the exact minute, but I can't always be at the computer at 'just' the right moment. I've got it narrowed down to that approximation, however.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too ran the updatedb.exe file, and after that it does stableize for a while, then it starts to creep up again.... Lets give them a little time to figure it out and hopefully it will be soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are at least two separate issues with at least two sets of symptoms being described here. One is connected to updates, the other is not. What is also clear is that neither one can be duplicated by any machine available to our team, so we're at a little of a loss here. I am thinking about this and will PM again with more test instructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everybody,

I've just registered to the forum today.

I'm experiencing the same problem (mbamservice.exe is eating a lot lot of memory) with the new 1.43 version.

I've never got any problem with 1.42.

I'm a long time Malwarebytes user and I've never been disapointed to purchase the full version (3 years ago).

Today I've decided to disable Malwarebytes (I know this not the SOLUTION) but I'm tired to reboot my computer every six hours to get mbamservice.exe set to a normal memory usage (37K at reboot but increasing to 80K after 6 hours browsing the web...and 240K after 24 hours).

With 1.42 version mbamservice.exe started with 37K and never up to 45 or 50K memory usage even after 2 or 3 days without reboot).

Please dear administrator Swandog46 I need your help...shutting down Malwarebyte is not the solution... isn'it?

But what can I do...reboot my computer each 6 hours...that's really not the solution too!!! Then what else?

I've sent an email to the the Help support desk and they invited me to join this board where I could get all the help I need.

Any help would be very very appreciated (PM or email me Swandog46...I'm waiting your instructions)

Sorry for my so so english (I'm from France)

All the best

JJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

A shot in the dark: can it be related to some Windows service?

Therefore, can you tell us on which services MBAM relies on?

Maybe some of these services are disabled on our machines. (for security reasons)

Also, does it rely on some local and/or distant ports related to TCP/IP? (being blocked by a firewall and/or router)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi everybody,

I've just registered to the forum today.

I'm experiencing the same problem (mbamservice.exe is eating a lot lot of memory) with the new 1.43 version.

I've never got any problem with 1.42.

I'm a long time Malwarebytes user and I've never been disapointed to purchase the full version (3 years ago).

Today I've decided to disable Malwarebytes (I know this not the SOLUTION) but I'm tired to reboot my computer every six hours to get mbamservice.exe set to a normal memory usage (37K at reboot but increasing to 80K after 6 hours browsing the web...and 240K after 24 hours).

With 1.42 version mbamservice.exe started with 37K and never up to 45 or 50K memory usage even after 2 or 3 days without reboot)...

What

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the infamous "memory creep" in ver. 1.42, but that seemed to disappear in ver. 1.43. However, lately, on rebooting I was unable to start real-time protection module, with the "error:1073" window popping up, followed immediately by the "protection started" message box. Unfortunately, when opening another pane in the MBAM control panel (Updates, eg.) and then returning to the Protection pane, it shows real-time protection again DISABLED. Toggling Start Protection brought back the 1073 error message yet again. Finally, I went to the Win7 start menu and typed in <services.msc>, then paged down to the MBAMServices entry. Here it showed that the service had NOT started (I had loaded in the MANUAL start option, as previously using "start with Windows" option in the MBAM control panel caused inordinately long loading time for the Desktop after the "Welcome" screen routine completed); right-clicking on the MBAMServices line, I toggled <start>, and the application launched without a hitch, and seemingly, with no memory hogging after ca. 1hr.

I have found in the past that the untoward behaviour of MBAM protedtion can be correlated with updates, though I cannot document which update caused problem, or indeed fixed them. Basically, difficulties centred about: rapidly-rising memory usage; and failure to start Protection module.

These problems seem to begin spontaneously, then appear to be sorted after (?) db updates, then mysteriously reappear after a PC reboot. Once t

the app is started and stablilised, I can run it for several days with PC in <sleep> mode between uses. Quirkiness is really a puzzler.

PC: HP dv6 series, Win7 Home Premium

Other security system installed: McAfee Security Suite (Comcast), with real-time monitoring and virus-scanning enabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the problem resolved for Windows Vista/7 and created for Windows XP.

Only XP users are complaining about it, at least i think so.

Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well I am on XP here and I am not having any issues, at least not that I aware of. Mbamservice is only taking 51K as far as I can see from taskmanager... and mbamgui is taking only 2K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its creeping up a little bit on XP Pro but causes no performance problem for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well I am on XP here and I am not having any issues, at least not that I aware of. Mbamservice is only taking 51K as far as I can see from taskmanager... and mbamgui is taking only 2K

My mbamgui is taking 5,028 K. Isn't that just the program interface? I don't even have it open, is this normal?

I've been away from the computer for a few hours and it's been on standby. Desktop is holding steady at the moment. But that could change. It's been...someone else here used the word "quirky". For example, I had it down to running the update or the dbupdate.exe keeping the memory increase at bay for about 52-54 minutes before it would start again, I figured aha, I've found the pattern here, but then the last go round it went for about 65 -70 minutes of behaving before the usage started going up again by 32 K per minute. So I clicked on the dbupdate.exe on my desktop again and then I had to go out. And now I'm back, and the memory usage is staying put. But the level it's at is still not the norm I've seem for this program. It was at 80,000 yesterday before I rebooted, and it's sitting at 77,308 right now. Quite frankly, at only 1 G memory, usage like what the OP was experiencing with 618,000 K would cripple my system. Before my son got his own laptop, he used to crank Firefox up to over the high 200,000's and I think even into 300,000+, and at that point taskmanager was showing 6,000 K left for the system. Trying to do anything else with the computer at that point got pretty difficult.

I did notice that MWB right now doesn't let go of memory. For example, if it goes up a bit when a browser is opened or if there's a spike due to an update, it'll never go back down to what it was before the event, even if the event is over. I don't know if 1.42 was doing that or not. I didn't pay much attention, I just kind of noticed in passing a general usage of about 45,000 K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My mbamgui is taking 5,028 K. Isn't that just the program interface? I don't even have it open, is this normal?

Here too but only when i ran updatedb.exe many times.

Well I give up. I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll see if my usage goes down with IP protection off when I am at my computer again, Marcin.

I'm not sure why, but I never seem to have these issues that some other people have, maybe I/my computer are just lucky :D lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just curious -- while our developers look into this -- does the same issue happen if IP protection is off?

Yes, same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Amethyst

Hmm that's very interesting. Seems as though you've found a pattern on this, at least.

I haven't noticed any increased usage on my computer, which seems kinda strange, from reading in this thread it seems like I *should* be experiencing something.

Also in regard to Firefox, I never really see it hogging that much memory while in usage, even when I do have like 5+ tabs open at once. I just don't pay attention really though to how much memory is being used by something unless the computer is slowing down. I know that other people do have slow Firefox issues though.

I restart or turn off my computer at least once a week. When its not in use, its usually in Hibernate mode with the internet off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll see if my usage goes down with IP protection off when I am at my computer again, Marcin.

I'm not sure why, but I never seem to have these issues that some other people have, maybe I/my computer are just lucky :D lol

Sorry @mountaintree16 but i never had problems with security softwares.

I've been using Avira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Marco :D

In the future, please use the "add reply" button at the bottom of the page or erase what the person you are replying to said. Thanks :D

I'm glad that you haven't had any issues up until this point.

I didn't mean issues as in just THIS issue, though.

Hopefully this issue gets figured out soon :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was able to partially reproduce this on one of our lab machines. It is a step forward in the right direction -- we will have more information for you shortly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was exactly to you mountaintree16 :D

Althought i appreciate ur concerns.

Regards,

Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.