vCenter - Java RAM utilisation



  • Hi lads and lasses,

    I noticed something that seemed out of the ordinary this morning on my vCenter server.
    There is a huge amount of RAM being used by several instances of java.exe.
    These instances have all spawned from several instances of wrapper.exe (see attached image.)
    All of them have spawned from the VMware folder.

    I have attached a screenie from Process Explorer (working set size is 4th column from left) at the end of this post.

    I have a few questions regarding this.

    1. What is wrapper.exe used for?
    2. Would manually installing a new version of Java cut down the amount of resources being used
    3. Any idea what it is doing/trying to do?

    I have:

    • rebooted the server
    • taskkill /f /fi "imagename eq java.exe"
    • applied Server updates

    Environment variables:
    Server 2008 R2 Enterprise

    • 4GB RAM
      Java (standalone i.e. the one in add/remove programs) is not installed
      Server is virtualised

    Ticket 598 001.jpg



  • Never really looked at that before but I suspect that vCenter actually runs on Java and, like many programs that do that, it probably bundles it.



  • What's the file location of wrapper.exe?



  • vCenter's a little RAM heavy. If I'm reading this right, you're using the same server for vCenter and Veeam. If that's the case, you'll want to give it extra RAM.



  • You can tweak down the RAM usage if necessary. But I am not sure that I would recommend that.



  • @Dashrender said:

    What's the file location of wrapper.exe?

    Wrapper.exe and java.exe have all spawned from the VMware directory

    @alexntg said:

    vCenter's a little RAM heavy. If I'm reading this right, you're using the same server for vCenter and Veeam. If that's the case, you'll want to give it extra RAM.

    Yeah, that's just for evaluation purposes. I think I'll add more RAM regardless.

    @scottalanmiller said:

    You can tweak down the RAM usage if necessary. But I am not sure that I would recommend that.

    Yeah, I'll pass on that. I was more concerned that it was broken and needed fixing but from the sounds of things, it isn't broken. So, no need to fix it then 🙂

    Thanks lads 🙂


Log in to reply