Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 575017
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T13:53:35+00:00 2026-05-13T13:53:35+00:00

I am investigating a strange problem with my application, where the behaviour is different

  • 0

I am investigating a strange problem with my application, where the behaviour is different on 2 versions of Windows:

  • Windows XP (32-bit)
  • Windows Server 2008 (64-bit)

My findings are as follows.

Windows XP (32-bit)

When running my test scenario, the XML parser fails at a certain point during the parsing of a very large configuration file (see this question for more information).

At the time of failure, the process size is approximately 2.3GB. Note that a registry key has been set to allow the process to exceed the default maximum process size of 2GB (on 32-bit operating systems).

The system of the failure is a call to IXMLDOMDocument::load() failing, as described in the question linked above.

Windows Server 2008 (64-bit)

I run exactly the same test scenario in Windows Server 2008 — the only variable is the operating system. When I look at my process under Task Manager, it has a * 32 next to it, which I am assuming means it is running in 32-bit compatibility mode.

What I am noticing is that at the point where the XML parsing fails on Windows XP, the process size on Windows Server 2008 is only about 1GB (IOW, approximately half the process size as on Windows XP).

The XML parsing does not fail on Windows Server 2008, it all works as it should.

My questions are:

  1. Why would a 32-bit application (running in 32-bit mode) consume half the amount of memory on a 64-bit operating system? Is it really using half the memory, it is usual virtual memory differently, or is it something else?

  2. Acknowledging that my application (seems) to be using half the amount of memory on Windows Server 2008, does anyone have any ideas as to why the XML parsing would be failing on Windows XP? Every time I run the test case, the error accessed via IXMLDOMParseError (see this answer) is different. Because this appears to be non-deterministic, it suggests to me that I am running into a memory usage problem rather than dealing with malformed XML.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T13:53:35+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 1:53 pm

    You didn’t say how you observed the process. I’ll assume you used Taskmgr.exe. Beware that it’s default view gives very misleading values in the Memory column. It shows Working set size, the amount of RAM that’s being used by the process. That has nothing to do with the source of your problem, running out of virtual memory space. There is not much reason to assume that Windows 2008 would show the same value as XP, it has a significantly different memory manager.

    You can see the virtual memory size as well, use View + Columns.

    The reason your program doesn’t bomb on a 64-bit operating system is because 32-bit processes have close to 4 gigabytes of addressable virtual memory. On a 32-bit operating system, it needs to share the address space with the operating system and gets only 2 gigabytes. More if you use the /3GB boot option.

    Use the SAX parser to avoid consuming so much memory.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 297k
  • Answers 297k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer dd if=/dev/urandom of=somefile bs=somesize count=1 See the man page for… May 13, 2026 at 7:24 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Why not start with a web design software? Once you… May 13, 2026 at 7:24 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Move the core functionality from JellyBeanResult to GenericResult and have… May 13, 2026 at 7:24 pm

Related Questions

Okay, I have been messing around with different sorting algorithms in Ruby; mainly variations
I am trying to debug a strange problem with Windows XP (SP3) Adobe AIR
I am currently in the process of investigating a very peculiar problem on our
I am investigating a Java issue (using IBM JVM 1.4.2 64-bit) on Red Hat
I'm hoping someone has seen this before because I can't for the life of

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.