What I would suggest is opening the process viewer and seeing what process allocates the memory. WebORB for .NET memory footprint is 15MB. However, if the code you host in there allocates a byte array for 5.6GB, that could explain the problem..
Mark --- In [email protected], "valdhor" <valdhorli...@...> wrote: > > I do not believe the Flex SWF's are taking up the memory (There is no way for > them to do so). > > It is more likely the language you are using with Flash remoting and WebORB. > Is it Java? I can see an improperly written Java class reserving large > amounts of mamory. What is the JVM settings? > > --- In [email protected], "kevin_ketterer" <kevinkett@> wrote: > > > > Sorry, the Flash SWF did NOT reserve any memory... so only the two Flex > > SWFs did. > > > > --- In [email protected], "kevin_ketterer" <kevinkett@> wrote: > > > > > > We have a Flex-based shopping cart applicatiion, using Cairngorm, WebORB, > > > and ASP.NET. It's running on IIS 7/Windows 2008 server. The release > > > version of the SWF is about 1.4MB in size. This is the only application > > > hosted on this server. > > > > > > Our server team tells us that when a client launches the application, it > > > reserves about 5.6GB of virtual memory, including 3GB of RAM. It only > > > used the memory it neede, however. Since this is a new installation for > > > the server team, we ran some comparison tests to see what "normal" is. > > > Each of the following apps were put in their own application pool: > > > > > > * An application with a plain ASP.NET (HTML) page did not reserve the > > > memory. > > > > > > * A small (~150k) Flex SWF in an HTML page reserved 5.6GB, but again used > > > much less. > > > > > > * A 4k Flash SWF in an HTML page reserved 3GB. > > > > > > Although this behavior is not causing an immediate problem, we are > > > concerned that this could become a bigger issue down the road. We would > > > also like to understand how a SWF that runs on the client might affect > > > server virtual memory. > > > > > > I'll appreciate any thoughts you might have on this issue. > > > > > > Thank you, > > > Kevin > > > > > >
