RE: DLLHOST.EXE and Secure Server Crash

From: Michael Laing (mdonlinelaing@microsoft.com)
Date: 08/23/02


From: mdonlinelaing@microsoft.com (Michael Laing)
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 21:01:38 GMT


Hi Tom,

Further to Tibor's suggestions, check and see that all of your COM+ .dll's
have been compiled with "Retain in Memory" and "Unattended Execution" both
set to "On". This is a very common problem with COM+ components and IIS.

Instead of using Exception Monitor, use Autodump+ as it gives more
information when the dump file(s) are created. You can download Autodump
Plus as part of the Debugging Tools for Windows from the following location:

http://www.microsoft.com/ddk/debugging/installx86.asp

If you require assistance debugging the dump files, you can create an
Incident with Microsoft Product Support Services.

Good luck,

Michael Laing
Microsoft Developer Support
Internet Information Server

***********************
>>Please do not send email directly to this alias. This is an online
account name for newsgroup participation only.<<

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
You assume all risk for your use.
2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
***********************
--------------------
| Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
| From: "Tibor Biro" <tiborbiro@rogers.com>
| Sender: "Tibor Biro" <tiborbiro@rogers.com>
| References: <O$IsHPtSCHA.1468@tkmsftngp11>
| Subject: DLLHOST.EXE and Secure Server Crash
| Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 13:41:06 -0700
| Lines: 107
| Message-ID: <7ba701c24ae5$67c44f40$3bef2ecf@TKMSFTNGXA10>
| MIME-Version: 1.0
| Content-Type: text/plain;
| charset="iso-8859-1"
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
| X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
| X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
| Thread-Index: AcJK5WfE6W2AAdkJQUeRsqsvFEhMBQ==
| Newsgroups: microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security
| Path: cpmsftngxa10
| Xref: cpmsftngxa10 microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security:10092
| NNTP-Posting-Host: TKMSFTNGXA10 10.201.226.38
| X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security
|
| Hi there,
|
| Try to locate the COM+ process linked to the runaway DLL
| process. You can do this by matching the process ID to the
| process ID displayed in Component Manager (in the COM+
| Applications view switch to Status View)
|
| This should point you to the failing COM+ application
| running inside dllhost.exe.
|
| If the application is IIS Out-Of-Process Pooled
| Applications then the problem is in your ASP code and
| whatever COM component it is calling at the time. In this
| case try using the IIS Exception Monitor
| (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default.asp?
| url=/technet/prodtechnol/iis/downloads/ixcptmon.asp) to
| create a dump and examine it.
|
| Other than the above try putting all your COM components
| in separate COM+ applications and run them as Server
| Applications. This will create different dllhost.exe
| processes for each component allowing you to narrow down
| the problematic one.
|
| I hope this helps, post your progress here please.
|
| Regards,
| Tibor Biro
|
| >-----Original Message-----
| >We seriously need help with this one:
| >
| >1. We are medium-size, medium volume transaction
| ecommerce site running IIS
| >5.0 on Windows Server 2000 (SP2 and 3). We run between 6-
| 8 front end servers
| >(HTTP) with 2-3 dedicated SSL servers. We have very few
| COM objects (a third
| >party mailer object, two online payment verification
| objects), with the bulk
| >of the application written in ASP (using VBScript).
| Not .NET Framework
| >installed on any of the servers.
| >2. Somewhere around mid- to late July the SSL servers
| began to inexplicably
| >crash. The problem continues up to the present. The HTTP
| front end servers
| >do not seem to be effected. Through troubleshooting
| steps, we have
| >eliminated two pieces of software we installed at roughly
| the same time as
| >possible suspects. We also performed a code review in the
| secure area at the
| >same time.
| >
| > 3. A symptom of the problem centers around memory
| consumption by the
| >dllhost.exe process. Typically, memory consumption is
| observed to increase
| >until an error is thrown--"Address cannot be read,
| dllhost.exe." After
| >attaching Windows Debugger to a runaway dllhost.exe
| process, there are two
| >things to note: A). access is denied to the loaded module
| listing, and B).
| >the expanded info on each dllhost.exe instantiation
| reports on info coming
| >from Component Services. In one instance, the mailer
| object was listed, and
| >in most of the others, the IIS Out-Of-Process Pooled
| Applications (The Web
| >Applications Manager).
| >
| >QUESTIONS:
| >
| >1. I would like to get more information on DLLHOST.EXE.
| Specifically: How
| >does it work? How can I safely view the modules it is
| loading (Again, the
| >Debugger does not allow access to the proccesses). Any
| help here would be
| >greatly appreciated, as there seems to be a complete
| dearth of info out
| >there on the subject. Also, more info on the IIS Out-Of-
| Process Pooled
| >Applications would be great. What little info I've found
| is well-nigh
| >incomprehensible.
| >
| >2. What are some of the common reasons for excessive
| DLLHOST.EXE memory
| >consumption? Does anyone have a list of ASP/ADO errors
| that could lead to
| >problem we're dealing with? With the software eliminated
| as a possibility,
| >we're going to take another look at the ASP code again.
| >
| >Any suggestions?
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >
| >.
| >
|



Relevant Pages

  • RE: server upgrade question
    ... At my university we have 10 servers. ... GIG of memory running Debian 4.0. ... most of our applications are heavy compute and memory ... first before trying to "upgrade" the system. ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: ASP.NET 1.1/ASP.NET 2.0 and IIS5
    ... on IIS 5, asp.net appdomains are hosted by a seperate application. ... Currently we are running ASP.NET 1.1 in production with over 30+ 1.1 ... Recently we have written several applications using ... of our servers from the farm. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: [SLE] 32-bit machines hit physical RAM limit at 4GB?
    ... But these applications run fine on my servers with a lot ... more memory, ... Your applications continue to work because they are still using at most 4GB ... memory space, which is the linux maximum, even on a kernel with PAE ...
    (SuSE)
  • Re: xmalloc string functions
    ... require memory allocations depending on the way the system works. ... If the toolkit being used is not one of those, then it is irrelevant that some provide a means to do so, particularly if the "some" are not available for the platform being targeted. ... Not enough context for most real-world applications to recover at this point. ... At this point g_malloccalling abortbecomes a moot point, particularly if your auto-save code is robust against memory allocation errors. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: ProDOS Plus
    ... operating system was not considered worth the problems when it was just as easy to make the applications support 128k or more ram. ... your suggested P-code system could do something similar by running in the aux 64k memory range $D000...FFFF or perhaps the aux ram used by the P8 /ram driver code space. ... the OS could fit in *only* the space that ProDOS now occupies. ... if practicality were a concern we probably wouldn't be using old hardware. ...
    (comp.sys.apple2)