Author Topic: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!  (Read 10086 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicolas

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • I'm not a llama!
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2005, 11:54:53 PM »
Avast 4.6.691, Home edition, sensitivity set high, on Win2k Pro;
ashWebSv.exe uses 13,234,176 Bytes (12.62 MB).

Avast does not have a noticeable slowing down effect on this 1.6 GHz computer.

If the memory usage keeps growing there most likely is a program running written in some C language that does not have a proper memory management.

Win2k Pro, 1.5 GHz, 500 MB RAM, Intelbased; Avast AV, Clamwin AV; Sygate Firewall; Spybot S&D, WinPatrol, Ad-Aware, Spyware Doctor; Microsoft AntiSpyware, Spyware Blaster, ActivePorts, Rootkit Revealer, Disk Investigator, Scrip Trap, HijackThis ; Ewido Sec. Suite, IceSword.

Offline zeroality

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #16 on: July 18, 2005, 02:16:14 AM »
If that's the case, how would I go about finding out which program it is?

Offline lukor

  • Avast team
  • Super Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1886
    • AVAST Software
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #17 on: July 18, 2005, 12:50:32 PM »
Wow. Regular .zip reduced it to only 15 mb. Man, am I glad I re-checked this topic. :)

http://www.pokerealm.net/zero/ashWebSv.zip

Thanks, downloaded without a problem. I'll report any findings here.
Lukas.

Offline Nicolas

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • I'm not a llama!
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2005, 02:20:58 PM »
If that's the case, how would I go about finding out which program it is?

Hard to find. The C programming languages require additional garbage collection instructions, otherwise the proces garbage piles up.
It is just a possibility, something else may be wrong.
I hope your uploaded file may contain the clue. 

 
Win2k Pro, 1.5 GHz, 500 MB RAM, Intelbased; Avast AV, Clamwin AV; Sygate Firewall; Spybot S&D, WinPatrol, Ad-Aware, Spyware Doctor; Microsoft AntiSpyware, Spyware Blaster, ActivePorts, Rootkit Revealer, Disk Investigator, Scrip Trap, HijackThis ; Ewido Sec. Suite, IceSword.

Offline lukor

  • Avast team
  • Super Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1886
    • AVAST Software
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2005, 07:32:15 PM »
If that's the case, how would I go about finding out which program it is?

Hi Zeroality, the dump seems pretty normal ;-) Every thread is where it should be and I don't know how to find more from it. It seems WebShield is doing this weird thing regularly on your PC. Could you collect some more info when it again eats too much memory?

1) download and run TcpView from www.sysinternals.com and export the output from it 

2) enable logging in avast4.ini

[WebScanner]
EnableLogging=1

and post also the log file in <avast4>\data\log\ashwebsv.log

3) does the memory consuption returns to normal when you close all Internet Explorer windows?

4) does it happens when you turn off "Enable Web Scanning" in the WebShield configuration page?

Thanks.
Lukas.

Offline zeroality

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2005, 02:21:36 AM »
I gave up on waiting. I went ahead and did a full system reformat so I'm afraid I won't be able to help you out on #1 and #2.

As for #3, that's a no and #4 is a no as well. I closed all IE windows and the memory consumption kept increasing by about 3-5 MB per hour and I have never messed with avast settings except to disable logging.

Thanks for trying to help anyway.

Offline lukor

  • Avast team
  • Super Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1886
    • AVAST Software
Re: Avast process ashWebSv.exe using a lot of RAM!
« Reply #21 on: July 20, 2005, 02:53:26 PM »
I gave up on waiting. I went ahead and did a full system reformat so I'm afraid I won't be able to help you out on #1 and #2.

And now is everything all right or the error has re-appeared?