Large peak commit charge at start up

Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
When I first log on after boot up and immediately open the windows Task Manager I always find a peak commit charge of around 427450 (see attachment) plus or minus 50.

Because my daily applications never use this much memory this peak charge does not increase during the day. But next morning at start up there it is again, very consistent.

Microsoft Bootvis shows only explorer.exe and Sygate Personal firewall running at start up.

HiJackThis shows nothing of concern (see attachment)

dxdiag shows no problems.

How can I determine what is using so much memory at start up?

XP Home SP2, ASUS A8V Deluxe, AMD Athlon 64 3000+, 1 GB (dual 512) Kingston, everything latest updates and versions.
 

Attachments

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
Nothing unusual in the Process tab.
This is a new computer, but I will try the rootit hijacker.
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
45,855
How much difference is there if you look at those figures in Safe Mode?

Also in Administrative Tools > Performance, do you have any performance counters or trace logs enabled?
 

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
Will try Safe Mode after work later today and report back

Are there any tutorials on Performance counters and trace logs? New area for me.
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
45,855
I was actually thinking that if you had something enabled, it might be consuming resources -- such as the page file itself. I don't think that "peak" value is primarily ram being used, since you have more than enough available in the screen shot. More than I do, for 1 gig installed ram anyway.

I don't have much experience with these either, and there are not a lot of good tutorials on using them around.

However I do have this in my bookmarks:

http://www.windowsnetworking.com/articles_tutorials/Windows_2003_Performance_Monitor.html

This might be good viewing, haven't watched it myself -- don't have the bandwidth:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/823887/

It's possible you might be able to enable something which will give you a trace log during bootup, but I've never done anything with them. You need to watch that the file does not get abnormally large over time if you leave it enabled.
 

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
When I log on in Safe Mode I get exactly the same Peak Commit Charge of 427465. I guess this means my problem lies in the Boot Up or the Log On stage?

I will watch that video you suggest in the next few days.
 

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
Just to clear the paging file I set it to zero, rebooted, defraged and set it back to 512 minimum and 800 maximum. Made no difference to the Peak Commit Charge.

Good question about the processor. AMD describes it as 64 bit capable for the future but also 32 bit enabled for the present.

Where to now?
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
45,855
Right now, I'd have to say -- I don't have a clue -- and just ignore it since it really isn't causing any problems.

The "peak" value is "history" really, and if it does not approach or exceed your installed ram, you should be fine.

You want to pay attention to the current amts of available ram -- that's the key to performance at any given moment as long as you are not seeing some process hog the cpu.
 

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
The only process I have seen hog the memory was HiJackThis. When I ran that, trying to solve this problem, the Peak Commit Charge jumped to 940764. I reported this to HiJackThis, but never received any reply. That is why I have tried to follow up on this Peak Commit, because there must be something wrong somewhere.

I once saw somewhere that there is a way to have Windows check itself for any corrupt files? Is that something I could try?
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
45,855
You can run chkdsk to check for file corruption in general or

sfc /scannow

to check for missing or corrupt system files.

running either carries a small degree of risk. The first is that you may choose to fix something required for booting. I haven't seen this happen in XP, but I can't rule it out.

The second is that a file will get replaced from the wrong source if the proper source path information is not present in the registry. I've seen this once or twice, it's more likely to happen on updated systems with service pack installs.

I don't think either would be fruitful here, as corrupt files will usually produce error messages.

To run chkdsk you can right click on the local disk and select Properties > Tools > Error checking.

sfc /scannow does not produce any prompts or confirmations unless it cannot find what it needs. So you never know whether it has done something or not unless it needs your help.
 

thomas175

Thread Starter
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
55
I have run chkdsk a couple of times in the last week.

sfc /scannow sounds a little risky.
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
45,855
It's a small risk; I just don't see the potential benefit here. I don't see how this can be a file system problem.
 
Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Staff online

Top