ashServ.exe memory usage

[Joost]

I realised that if you don't disable the self-defence protection, avast thinks the scanner is still off even if it already started again (using services.msc). With self-defence disabled, that isn't the case.

EDIT: Now I see it's more like: the first time you restart, avast don't believe it; the second time, avast believes it.

[maxxx126]

The update which came out today seems to have fixed the problem, the VM used by ashServ.exe stays around 32MB.

Thanks a lot for fixing it but I don't like the fact that instead of saying "yes, there is a problem and we are trying to fix it ASAP", they tried to blame it on the users and their environment first, maybe it's the company policy never to admit a mistake like someone named GWB...

[DavidR]

What update was that ?

The program version 4.8.1351 has been out for some time now and a VPS update wouldn't have this impact as far as I'm aware.

No notifications of a recent program update yet, http://www.avast.com/eng/avast-4-home_pro-revision-history.html.

So any change may be a coincidence.

[igor]

The update which came out today seems to have fixed the problem, the VM used by ashServ.exe stays around 32MB.

So, you can see for yourself that the problem is not that simple - there was no update today, yet the behavior changed for you.
It needs deeper inspection before concluding there is a problem.

Vlk said the update will probably be released next week.

[popish]

When Vlk said next week, it was last week. So we expect a solution THIS WEEK.

I don't know what maxxx126 is seeing, but I see a consistent problem, all the time, with all my boots. And I supplied a dump so you can see and resolve this.

I am very unhappy with you because you do not seem to be oriented towards user service. First you ignore this, then you let users say that it is not important (without correcting them). And you have not tried to find a solution, even a temporary one. Bad service.

As a result of various posts, I found that I could open Windows services, stop the Avast service, the restart it, and gain my memory back. It did not require the self defense to be off.
You could have told me that, and saved me from several boots. Like I said - bad service.

[Lisandro]

When Vlk said next week, it was last week. So we expect a solution THIS WEEK.

popish, I think we users, aren't in a position of demanding what avast team should do.
They always try to do their best, but, after all, we can't complain for 90 millions of free computers being protected.

I am very unhappy with you because you do not seem to be oriented towards user service. First you ignore this, then you let users say that it is not important (without correcting them). And you have not tried to find a solution, even a temporary one. Bad service.

Correcting your impression of mine. They're free to correct me, for sure, and I'll thank than. I usually thank feedbacks. They're investigating what is happening in your computer, I can't see where they're ignoring that. Just it is your computer, not 90 millions of computers. Their program is working well in the vast majority of computers. Besides, nobody is ignoring you.

Like I said - bad service.

You're always free to move on. Although I see the reason won't be that avast team did not try to solve your trouble, on contrary.

[maxxx126]

The update which came out today seems to have fixed the problem, the VM used by ashServ.exe stays around 32MB.

So, you can see for yourself that the problem is not that simple - there was no update today, yet the behavior changed for you.
It needs deeper inspection before concluding there is a problem.

Vlk said the update will probably be released next week.

I thought there was an update, but I guess it was just a database update, my bad. I never said that the problem was that simple, just that instead of blaming it on users configurations you should accept that it is a bug in the current version of your software.

If the behavior temporarily changed for me, it is because I had disabled the webshield and forgot to reenable it. Now that I have reenabled it, the VM used by ashServ.exe is starting to increase again...
So basically, no change of behavior, sorry if I let other users think that the problem was fixed. (I CAN accept that I made a mistake, even if I said "seems to have fixed" !)

[Lisandro]

I thought there was an update, but I guess it was just a database update, my bad. I never said that the problem was that simple, just that instead of blaming it on users configurations you should accept that it is a bug in the current version of your software.

They acknowledge it and are working on it. Calm down. We'll have a program update soon.

[Joost]

Just it is your computer, not 90 millions of computers. Their program is working well in the vast majority of computers.

I wouldn't be certain that this is true. I have also a very normal system and I did nothing special with it and I have the problem. I think it is a serious problem, else they wouldn't announce a new build.

I also found the post of maxxx126 strange, but now we know why. He still has the problem.

I think the reason there aren't a lot of people "complaining" here is

1) Not everyone has already the new version.
2) People looking for the problem found already this topic and the announcement of a new build.
3) Only very few people will find the memory-problem with ashServ.exe if their computer is slow.
4) You will only have a problem if your computer is working for quite a long time, else if you have a fast computer, you maybe will not notice it soon.
5) To post a comment here you must
5.1 know English
5.2 look for a solution on the internet
5.3 find this forum
5.4 make an account
5.5 have time to post something
5.6 want to post something, as I said people find the problem already investigated

...

Not that I am thinking that I am special because I'm posting something here. But I'm not surprised that there are only a few comments on this topic.

EDIT: OK, I see your post now. I'm also a bit nervous because of the problem.

[maxxx126]

I thought there was an update, but I guess it was just a database update, my bad. I never said that the problem was that simple, just that instead of blaming it on users configurations you should accept that it is a bug in the current version of your software.

They acknowledge it and are working on it. Calm down. We'll have a program update soon.

I am calm. I think that for someone who is not supposed to work for them you defend them quite vehemently... and you have a strange way to use the "we" like in "we're on beta phase" and "We'll have a program update soon"
Or maybe you are just defending yourself since you were the one who was blaming the problem on the users and not on the software... 
It is true that Vlk didn't post much and wrote "This is an issue that will deserve a new build.". You are the one who make people confused by making them believe that you are an admin.

[Gopher John]

When Vlk said next week, it was last week. So we expect a solution THIS WEEK.

Actually, it was August 31, 2009, 01:45:33 PM that Vlk replied and said next week in
Reply #53 in this thread.  

[Laskaris]

Problem with "memory usage" is known for quite a while. It is practically impossible to find out how much memory avast takes. I ran few tests and it appears it uses cca 50 MB of REAL memory. Virtual memory usage is somewhat higher - on my pc it is for ashServ between 30 and 105 Mb but this has no impact on performance of my system - XP SP3 on Laptop HPNX6325 (Sempron CPU, 1,5 GB RAM etc.. Avira, much praised for being so good optimized uses about 70 MB of virtual memory and cca 20-30 MB of real memory. What can be annoying with avast is CPU intensive update (about 25 % CPU usage luckily in short period of time). Avast consumes maximum 50 MB of REAL RAM - figures in task manager can be missleading. It seams that program addresses once accessed RAM and it is visible in task manager. Despite this, RAM is free -  task manager "lies" about used RAM. Just measure how much memory uses with all services and turn off service by service. At the end you will end up with cca 40 MB freed (without any AVAST service). Add 10-15 MB for GUI - this gives in final result some 50 MB of real memory usage. It is not a big deal for older PC let alone new. I did not conduct tests on vista - just on XP SP3.

update: VM usage of ashServ.exe is 102 MB after three days of constant downloading (torrent protocols and rapidshare). no slowdowns, these figures nerved me also  - it was the reason to test it a little bit. Maybe guys with high memory usage have something common (hardware or OS or third party program, firewall, antispyware, RAM manager etc..?)

regards,

M.

[popish]

Laskaris,
You probably do not have the problem we have. I see 100M VM size after just 3 hours of work.
Yesterday I got to 450M after 2.5 days.

You are right that this is virtual memory and not real and should not affect performance if not used. But I can see the same thing with Firefox - allocated memory not released, presumably not used, but overall performance gets worse and worse. I don't know why it happens in Windows, it should not.

What I wish is that Vlk will tell us where the problem is.
Not the details of the program, but why it affects only some of us. Maybe we can change whatever it is.

I also wish that somebody tells me *why* it is wrong to stop and then start the service (services.msc, thank you Joost), in order to release the memory.
I stopped the service, without disabling self-defense, got some warning and red markings all over the Avast tray icon. Then I restarted the service, all red flags disappeared, and ashServ.exe is eating my memory again, so it must be feeling fine 

[Lisandro]

I am calm. I think that for someone who is not supposed to work for them you defend them quite vehemently...

I trust the company, I work with them, side by side, as an user not an employee, for a long time.

and you have a strange way to use the "we" like in "we're on beta phase" and "We'll have a program update soon"

We, the users. All of us.

Or maybe you are just defending yourself since you were the one who was blaming the problem on the users and not on the software... 
It is true that Vlk didn't post much and wrote "This is an issue that will deserve a new build.". You are the one who make people confused by making them believe that you are an admin.

I'm not guilty when people misunderstand I'm not an admin. What did I do wrong?

[Lisandro]

I also wish that somebody tells me *why* it is wrong to stop and then start the service (services.msc, thank you Joost), in order to release the memory.

Because you're disabling the protection of the computer (or virtual computer) for some time and there is a no-zero possibility of a malware get activated. Disable the protection won't be the last word. There must be a solution, not a workaround.