cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Lsass.exe memory leak on SBS 2003 R2 and BE 11D

tk123
Level 2

A few months ago the memory used by lsass.exe started to grow from 50MB (with BE services disabled) to over 1.5GB in a a matter of weeks, until the server becomes unresponsive and must be restarted.

The issue seems to be caused by Symantec Backup Exec 11D and even if we upgraded from Rev. 6235 to Rev. 7170 and applied the SP5 and HotFix 70, the problem was not solved.

In the Event Logs the only errors associated with the backups are:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: VSS
Event ID 6013

Sqllib error: OLEDB Error encountered calling IDBInitialize::Initialize. hr = 0x80004005. SQLSTATE: 08001, Native Error: 18
Error state: 1, Severity: 16
Source: Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server
Error message: [DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (SECDoClientHandshake()).]SSL Security error.



Source: Backup Exec
Event ID 57860

An error occurred while attempting to log in to the following server: "server".
SQL error number: "0012".
SQL error message: "[DBNETLIB][ConnectionOpen (SECDoClientHandshake()).]SSL Security error.
".

----------------------------------------------

Stopping or restarting the Backup Exec 11D services will not release the lsass.exe memory and the server must be rebooted to avoid a lockout and subsequent AD/Exchange services unavailability.

Every time a backup job is performed (note that all backups are successfully completed) the increase in the memory used by lsass.exe is in the 100MB to 200MB range.

The Windows 2003 SBS Standard R2 server is 5.2.3790 Service Pack 2 Build 3790, has 4GB RAM and recommended updates and hotfixes installed.

Any solution to solve this issue is appreciated.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

CraigV
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited

Mmm...SQL Express shouldn't conflict with anything. It's used by BE for the very reason that it shouldn't conflict with any other SQL installation. It is basically its own stand-alone application.

Maybe check on an MS forum for confirmation there...

View solution in original post

3 REPLIES 3

CraigV
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited

Hi tk123,

 

If you check the errors logged in your post, it mentions a possible SQL error.

Check the TN below and apply the settings. Please report back on whether or not it helps!

http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH29539

Laters!!

tk123
Level 2

Thank you for your reply, CraigV. Although I didn't get to try your solution (the SQL error number is different in the article you mentioned) it guided us in the direction of checking the SQL Server instances status.

We noticed that the WIndows Update Services / KB960082 was failing to install for the SBSMONITORING instance (part of Small Business Server Monitoring tools) . The KB failed to install even if we tried to run it from the downloaded update and since we were not able to access/configure the monitoring services we decided to attempt the re-installation of the Server Tools service.

We followed the suggestions in the tech-archive.net posting (http://www.tech-archive.net/Archive/BackOffice/microsoft.public.backoffice.smallbiz/2007-12/msg00043.html), except that there was no Monitoring under "Default Web Site" or under C:\inetpub folder.

The re-installation of the Server Tools Monitoring service is failing (cannot instal MSDE SBSMONITORING instance and MSDE 2000 SP4) and the SBS Setup wizard now is in "uncompleted/continue" phase, but the Backup Exec jobs no longer impacts the lsass.exe process (which sits quietly at less than 50MB).

We have still to find a solution to re-install the SBS Monitoring tools and complete the configuration wizard, which may conflict with the SQL 2005 Server Express Edition installed by Backup Exec 11D.

Any suggestion on how to fix this new issue is appreciated.

 

CraigV
Moderator
Moderator
Partner    VIP    Accredited

Mmm...SQL Express shouldn't conflict with anything. It's used by BE for the very reason that it shouldn't conflict with any other SQL installation. It is basically its own stand-alone application.

Maybe check on an MS forum for confirmation there...