store.exe leaking memory????

[ronin2307]

hi, i just installed ex2007 standard on a brand new server with 4GB or RAM. on a daily basis I get virtual memory low messages and I see that store.exe takes up about 3.5GB of memory. it starts low and eventually rises to that level and it would probably go higher if I wouldn't restart it.
can somebody tell me if this is normal?
We only have 120 users so I can't see why this would happen.

 

[58sniper]

I'll take a look at some of our servers, but that doesn't seem to be any different than past versions (the memory usage). Exchange likes to run almost entirely in RAM, so it will grab it if it's available.

Do you see anything in the event logs?

Pat Richard, MCSE MCSA:Messaging CNA
Microsoft Exchange MVP
Want to know how email works? Read for yourself -

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt

 

[Zelandakh]

Exactly what version of Windows are you running?

 

[ronin2307]

running a fresh 2003 standard server 64bit version

 

[Zelandakh]

SP0 or SP1?
Straight or R2?

4GB of RAM means you should have 6GB of RAM assigned to the page file - is that right?

 

[ronin2307]

R2 with all available updates and the page file is now up to 7.6 GB

 

[Zelandakh]

Change the page file to 6GB and restart (or set to system managed).

 

[ronin2307]

won't make any difference. it was increased because the store.exe was demanding almost 3.7GB of RAM. if you take into account the fact that the OS and many other processes need RAM as well it will just increase again

 

[Zelandakh]

store.exe doesn't demand RAM, it takes RAM that is not in use by other processes.

If you mean that the pagefile automatically increases, have you installed MDAC 2.8? I *think* that fixes a gremlin in Exchange 2007 that caused the expansion that exhibits the issue you are seeing. If not there is a hotfix for the library file in question.

 

[ronin2307]

either way, the memory in use extends beyond the 4GB that are in the machine and that is what pushes the page file increase...something is not right

 

[Zelandakh]

see my post above.