Skip to main content
To Customer Support To Customer Support
Hi.

 

I'm using Win 8.1 64.

Same results every time: Physical RAM is low, though the PC is using only 2 of the 16 GB. No other programs running, and largest process is explorer.exe around 300 MB,

 

I've also got WSA on a Win 8.1 32 with only 2 GB of RAM, and I've never seen a low RAM warning on that one.

 

The reason for posting in this thread was because I also get the "explorer memory leak" notification in the analyzer on the 64 bit PC, and I wondered if the two notifications could somehow be related (I guess not).

 

Anders

 
@ wrote:

Hi.

 

I'm using Win 8.1 64.

Same results every time: Physical RAM is low, though the PC is using only 2 of the 16 GB. No other programs running, and largest process is explorer.exe around 300 MB,

 

I've also got WSA on a Win 8.1 32 with only 2 GB of RAM, and I've never seen a low RAM warning on that one.

 

The reason for posting in this thread was because I also get the "explorer memory leak" notification in the analyzer on the 64 bit PC, and I wondered if the two notifications could somehow be related (I guess not).

 

Anders

 

Hi Anders, thankls for letting us know!

 

As Baldrick pointed out, it is just a tool.

 

Are you having any performance issues?

 

Webroot does have an excellent Tech Support Team and if you are  experiencing any performance issues or are further concerned, please feel free to contact them by submitting a support ticket

 

Let us know if we can assit you with anything else and come often and post!

 

Beth
@ wrote:

Hi AndersF

 

At the risk of being shouted down for saying it...I would not put too much store by the System Analyzer...it is provided as a facility and if I am perfectly honest I put my faith in other tools when it comes to assessing RAM usgage on my system.  That is not to say that it does not have it uses but in this instance I would rely on something else to give you the relevant information.

 

Regards

 

 

Baldrick

I have to agree with Baldrick it's just a Tool and if Windows itself telling you well that would be a different story as I have Win 7 x64 with 16GB of RAM. I just ran System Analyzer and it doesn't show on my system. 

 

Daniel ;)

 

Thanks To Baldrick, after I did PM him, he told me my Issue is also the same issue as described.

I have a Dell XPS, Window 8.1, with 16 Gig of Ram. 64-bit.

When I turn on my computer, If I Double Click on a folder,  It suddenly kind of freezes and If I have to wait about 10 seconds for the Folder to open. After that there is no problem, It only happens when I  Turn on my computer,

I think Window 8.1 Is Horrible. I never had these Issues with my window 7.

I don't use any Apps from the Apps.

Also I have installed this Classic Shell.     http://www.classicshell.net/

Therefore I can have my screen to be as window 7.

I personally Hate the Window 8 Interface.

Any Helps for me ?

Thanks
@ wrote:



Thanks To Baldrick, after I did PM him, he told me my Issue is also the same issue as described.

I have a Dell XPS, Window 8.1, with 16 Gig of Ram. 64-bit.

When I turn on my computer, If I Double Click on a folder,  It suddenly kind of freezes and If I have to wait about 10 seconds for the Folder to open. After that there is no problem, It only happens when I  Turn on my computer,

I think Window 8.1 Is Horrible. I never had these Issues with my window 7.

I don't use any Apps from the Apps.

Also I have installed this Classic Shell.     http://www.classicshell.net/

Therefore I can have my screen to be as window 7.

I personally Hate the Window 8 Interface.

Any Helps for me ?

Thanks

Hi Venus60!

 

When you turn on your computer, are you double clicking the folder immediately? Try giving it a few seconds before you doubleclick the folder. It takes a few seconds for everything to finish loading.

 

Beth
I have done a Test. Restarted my computer, and I Waited about 30 minutes, and Double clicked and same thing happen.

I think Baldrick was looking into it, and hopefully I can solve this Issue soon

Thanks.
@ wrote:

I have done a Test. Restarted my computer, and I Waited about 30 minutes, and Double clicked and same thing happen.

I think Baldrick was looking into it, and hopefully I can solve this Issue soon

Thanks.

Thank you Venus60!

 

@  will be here in a few hours. I just pinged him so he will be alerted and see your message when he gets here.

 

Nice to see you!

 

Beth
I too am running Windows 8.1, 64 bit OS on a Lenovo Ideapad and am getting the following when running WRSA System Anaylzer 

 

Graphics RAM is low which is impacting performance (this shouldn't be)

An active process has a possible memory leak (explorer.exe)

An active process has a possible handle leak (svchost.exe)

 

My issues began the begining of the September when there was an update issued from WRSA.  Then the other day on 9/28, I started getting a "file name warning" for c : program and can no longer run the 3D graphics portion of Photoshop due to low RAM.  When I looked into hidden files, found c: program and the properties listed it as being from WRSA.  I just found this thread and this has been ongoing on for some time.  It is disheartening to read that as of yet no solution has been found by WRSA and  it continues to be promoted as compatibel with the 64 bit OS, is that is the case.  

 

I'm a first time user of WRSA and am not feeling very confident that their product will be able to protect my system.  

]
Hello and Welcome to the Webroot Community!

 

Did you read what Lucas (TechToc) said here? https://community.webroot.com/t5/Webroot-SecureAnywhere-Antivirus/Explorer-exe-using-up-to-300mb-RAM/td-p/60523/page/27 and if you continue to have issues please Submit a Support Ticket and they can look into it your specific issues.

 

Thanks,

 

Daniel ;)
Thanks Daniel, no I had not read that and yes, it makes perfect sense and, to me, confirms that the issue should be considered a shared issue between both parties.  Just my two cent's worth on the subject.  It explains what the poster feels regarding MS and what they are doing but also that WRSA is having compatability issues wth the MS OS due to this and maybe shouldn't be recommeded for the Win 8.1, 64 bit OS.

 

Thanks again!!!
No he didn't say that I run WSA on Win 8.1 x64 with no issues at all with 2GB of RAM.

 

Daniel ;)
Oh, also, I did submit a ticket and received a very quick reply and solution, had to do a uninstall and reinstall of WRSA.  Seems it took care of this for now but I am concerned about what is next, since I have had issues with two updates now.  Keeping my fingers crossed.  I do have to commend the WR Support Techs as each time they have been very knowledgable and able to resolve the issues, very customer oriented.  I am in no way knocking the expertese of the Tech's or WR in general, just not happy with having any issues on a brand new computer that is more than capable of handling PS and had no problem doing so before the updates.

 

 
agreed, he did not say that, only explained what MS, the rest was my assessment 🙂
@ wrote:

Thanks Daniel, no I had not read that and yes, it makes perfect sense and, to me, confirms that the issue should be considered a shared issue between both parties.  Just my two cent's worth on the subject.  It explains what the poster feels regarding MS and what they are doing but also that WRSA is having compatability issues wth the MS OS due to this and maybe shouldn't be recommeded for the Win 8.1, 64 bit OS.

 

Thanks again!!!

This is not true!

 

Daniel 
I'm sorry my post is disturbing but see many different opinions here and just voicing mine.  I don't require agreement but perhaps if I explain...

 

Taking a unbias step back, whether or not MS is right or wrong with what they are doing with "their" operating system, it would be WR's responsibility to work around any/all issues if they are to market a product usuable with any OS.   I'm not saying they aren't or that their product is not valuable but the two seem to have a few kinks that need ironing out.  

 

 
Just a quick note on this topic. The behavior of Explorer is a result of Microsoft building fault tolerance into their software to prevent against crashes. This IS a good thing. It increases the overall stability of the operating system.

While we can control what we do, we have no control over what Microsoft chooses to do as a result. The Explorer process detects the inclusion of a non-Microsoft injected DLL and adds some additional buffers in place in the event that DLL causes a shell crash.



I hope that helps add another side to the coin when considering this behavior.



Thanks,

Lucas
Thank you for the reply, I genuinely appreciate getting additional knowledge and background info on anything.

 

Let me reiterate, I really am not looking to fault Webroot, their products or point a finger in either direction regarding why or where the issues stem from.  As a consumer I just want the product to work, point blank.  I don't want warnings popping up at all but since I don't live in a perfect world, stuff happens.

 

A bit more history....

 

I looked into properties, saw the file in question belonged to WR, naturally I contacted WR for advise and a resolution.   When I was logged on with a Geek Squad Tech, he repeatedly told me this was not from WR, was not covered and I would need to sign up for an additional membership with them to have my system checked.  During the remote session I showed him the file (which he was unable to locate), the properties and stated that I did indeed feel it was.  He didn't agree. I thanked him, put in an additional request regarding that session and sent a message to Webroot directly.  The Webroot Support Team, who really provide excellent customer service, on a scale of 1 to 5, they'd get a 10, absolutely no complaints regarding their speed of return reply and suggested resolutions.  That applies to this and the issue earlier in the month with the WR Upgrade that caused havoc on my system, I feel that was the start of these issues.  

 

Honestly, I don't, nor should I be expected to care one way or the other where the fault lies or the reasons why there is a problem, that doesn't resolve my computer issues.  

 

WR did get back to me right away, suggested the rename and reinstall of WRSA.  It worked great for a day. Now I have an additional file name warning but it's for the renamed file of c:program.exe, am I to rename and reinstall WR daily?  

 

From my perspective, yes, only my perspective

 

I have two products...

 

- Product A (computer with Windows 8.1, 64bit OS)

- Product B (Webroot)

 

from what I've read here...Product B states they are working on a fix to the ongoing issue that has been caused by Product A.  

I don't think Product A is going to adapt to accommodate Product B anytime soon.  So, the fix then falls onto Product B if they want to be considered as a viable component for use with Product A.  If they cannot fix it, there is a problem at this present time and therefore they are not completely compatible, simple math, it a yes or no, without explanation of where it initiated from.

 

We cannot eliminate Product A and am sure WR is doing what they can to resolve it.  However, in the meantime, at minimum it would be appropriate to state there "could" be compatibility issues running the application on this system.  It's documented here that at this time WR cannot resolve.

 

Sorry for my very long winded reply but I am getting frustrated and concerned about system integrity due to the ongoing issues.  

 

Thanks
 

Hello gambs. Firstly, you can be absolutely assured that there is no actual incompatibility between the two softwares, and SecureAnywhere is protecting your Windows 8.1 system at the deepest possible level, maintaining complete integrity. It shouldn't affect anyone with sufficient RAM. They will fix it for sure, but it isn't of the highest priority, since there are no serious issues evident.

 

I'd ask you to go back and consider fully some postings by JoeJ and  TechToc.

 

Specifically these may help:

        "Ultimately this issue isn't one with WSA, it is one where Microsoft has coded in a fault tolerance limit for Explorer (or other processes) to prevent crashing. The additional memory usage (mostly reservered and not written by the way) is just a way to ensure your shell doesn't crash when something goes wrong." (page 27)

       "The behavior of Explorer is a result of Microsoft building fault tolerance into their software to prevent against crashes. This IS a good thing. It increases the overall stability of the operating system.

While we can control what we do, we have no control over what Microsoft chooses to do as a result. The Explorer process detects the inclusion of a non-Microsoft injected DLL and adds some additional buffers in place in the event that DLL causes a shell crash." (page 30) 

   "the higher Explorer RAM is allocated by Windows in such a way that it will not impact system performance in any measurable or noticeable capacity. If you're experiencing any system performance degradation, I suggest writing into our support team so that they can inspect your logs and correct the issue." (page 5)

 
LOL, I did read that, it was what I was replying to.  You guys are too funny, ok, ok, I give up, there's nothing wrong, no compatibility issues, they work perfectly together, which would also mean, there is no MS faulty coding issue 🙂 again, no blame guys and definitely commend the loyalty of the group!!

 

Anyway, this wasn't the major concern of my issue, just another thing that came up when running WR tools after the c:program file name warning came up and I did, as always submit a support ticket, which I mentioned a few times here 🙂 it worked for a day and now is coming about the suggested rename from support....

 

Over and out, you win, I'm done :)

 
@   Sorry not to be able to help, and I wanted to stress that there wasn't an incompatibility per se. Which doesn't mean that individual issues cannot occur..

My guess would be that some files on your system probably need whitelisting, which would show up in logs. You didn't say if any whitelisting or log collection was done.

Although I don't use it, I'd imagine Photoshop uses a lot of resources?  Optimize performance | Photoshop CS4, CS5, CS6, CC

 

The issue you're seeing is surely a matter for individual support, as already advised.   Submit a Support Ticket
If anyone is subscribing to Adobe Cloud,i can see the need for maybe whitelistening components,as there are a great many apps downloadable,each with a great many processes that are all regularly updated,and aren't always known to the cloud.I will say,however,that Webroot doesn't take very long in getting files classified G(good) should you play the wait game and not open a ticket.Frequently when doing web design/development,there will be a need to have many Adobe apps open at once,I've done it,my wife is in school for web design/development,and i can say firsthand they can have a significant system impact.Even with several apps open at any given time,i have not had a single issue with Webroot.Even with explorer.exe showing high ram usage,it's just does not  affect system performance in any way whatsoever on my win 7 x64 machine or win 8.1 x64 machine.Even running some ram hungry MMO type games,i have not confronted a single issue where explorer's ram usage showing 300+ megs would affect performance in any way.I have shutdown webroot and run games and software,and have enabled Webroot and ran software,and have seen no difference in performance.Not ever.The only thing i have ever seen affect the performance of any software on the system is when a file is new to the cloud(U),and as a security measure i'm fine with that.It's better to be safe than sorry.It usually won't take long to get those files classified good,but it surely doesn't hurt opening a ticket and getting the ball rolling.
@ 

@ 

 

Thank you both providing useful suggestions and yes, I have putting in tickets with the poor Support Techs on and off since the begining of September.  They are working on it and have been great, as I have said, no problem with customer satifaction on that end.  

 

Photoshop, ohhh yes, can suck the life out of your system 😉 which is why I finally splurged and gave myself the.gift of this computer a few months ago, I am trying to teach myself 3D graphic design and loving it, woohoo!!!  The problems only occurring since the WR update last month :(

 

They did collect a log when the first issue began and it worked like a charm, so maybe that needs to be done again, will see what they say on Monday.

 

Thanks to all those who have had to read through my rants and those who have tried to offer help!!

 

Slowly backs out of the discussion....
The issue of 'C:Program' is related to Webroot, but unrelated to the 300MB Memory issue in this thread.

The issue of C:Program is a truncated WRSA install, that while running, isn't quite running correctly. To resolve it:

If WRSA is running from Program files, uninstall it, and reboot

Rename the file to C:Program.exe

From a CMD line run: C:Program.exe -showgui

You'll see the WRSA UI

From a CMD line run C:Program.exe -uninstall

Follow the uninstall prompts, and reboot

If this doesn't work, please let me know via a PM your email address via so that I can track your case down and we can setup a remote session.



Thanks,

Lucas Moore
Greetings community.

 

I think since the release of the KB3000850 update this infamous bug seems to be resolved, or at least in my case. It looks like something on Microsoft's end has changed. I have not been able to reproduce this bug since. Explorer is back to normal and other 64-bit applications, which are injected with wrusr.dll, are no longer affected as well.

 

Great news.
I can confirm as well as I just updated my Win 8.1 Pro x64 but I'm not sure it's because of the update KB3000850? But see it was the way Windows was handleing WRSA.exe and Windows Explorer very interesting!

 

Thanks,

 

Daniel ;)

 



 

 



 

Reply


Terms & Conditions