locked
searchfilterhost.exe using up to 35% of CPU

    Question

  • Hello,

    I just got the retail version of Windows Vista business.  I quickly noticed that my system was sometimes experiencing extreme slowdowns, so I went into the task manager and found out that the CPU load was always at 100% when this happened.  I then opened the ressource monitor and expanded the CPU bar.  Much to my surprise I found out that a process called searchfilterhost.exe was using between 20% and 35% of my CPU (I have a 3Ghz P4...!).

    I learned that this process was used by the windows search and indexing service.  But why the hell is it taking so much CPU juice?!  I remember working on my iTunes library in WinXP and everything was fluid, but in Vista, it can come to a point where just selecting songs in the list can get super slow (ie: you click on multiple songs and there comes a point where the 5 last songs you clicked on get highlighted 15 seconds later...)

    I kinda solved this problem by disabling indexing on the partition where my music library is, and by disabling Windows Search in Administrative tools>Services.  Now everything is as fast as it should be...!  But would there be another way to obtain this result?

    I think this is an issue that should seriously need Microsoft's attention...what about a fix to recalibrate ressource usage by the Windows Search service??
    Saturday, February 24, 2007 10:19 PM

All replies

  • I saw the same thing - the combination of SearchFilterHost.exe, SearchProtocolHost.exe and SearchIndexer.exe were running at 90%+ of CPU. The service is turned off now, but I wonder when I'll wish it wasn't.

    Bill
    Wednesday, March 7, 2007 9:50 PM
  • "I wonder when I'll wish it wasn't."
    Hem...guess you're 100% right about that one!
    Friday, March 9, 2007 11:32 PM
  • i've had the same problem equally i disabled it i have a feeling its part of thee search indexing and is meant to help speed up filesearches but due to whatever problems seems to just slow down your os had no trouble since i disabled it (about 1 week!?)

     

     

    Tuesday, March 13, 2007 12:16 AM
  • I have the same problem as the first guy discribed. God damn! Microsoft fix it or post a solution for this damn s***!
    Gafuliz
    Saturday, March 17, 2007 4:11 PM
  • Same problem here. Seriously, this is ridiculous. I'm running 100% CPU whenever i'm trying to listen to music? Google desktop does the same thing, but doesn't eat my CPU cycles like a Ford Excursion guzzles gas.
    Wednesday, March 21, 2007 4:25 AM
  • Try and disabling the .XML file extension from being indexed in the Indexing Options control panel.
    Sunday, March 25, 2007 1:29 AM
  • Thanks, Eric... That helped out a great deal..
    Sunday, March 25, 2007 2:34 PM
  • This worked for me as well. I disabled the .xml file type from being filtered and the process is working normally again! My overall CPU usage had gone back to a steady 5-10%. I'm using a dual core athlon 64 processor. I am going to learn moer about the indexing process as see if I can find anything else about this issue.

    - Durin

    Sunday, March 25, 2007 3:54 PM
  • Eric,

     

    I tried to disable the indexing of xml files.  Strangely, after I set it to either index properties only or uncheck it and then click okay, the next time I open the Indexing Options, the xml filter is reenabled.  Any ideas?

     

    Thanks!

    Scott

    Wednesday, April 18, 2007 2:17 AM
  • I had the same problem thanks for the Soluction Eric but why is this happening? Please can you explain?
    Saturday, April 21, 2007 1:27 AM
  • Same problem here when importing / listening in ITunes.  We didn't have this problem with Desktop Search on XP.
    Sunday, April 22, 2007 6:17 PM
  • Well...!  I can see that this topic is beginning to get pretty popular!  I hope this issue will at least be addressed in SP1...
    Sunday, April 22, 2007 8:25 PM
  • I have the same version (Business) and I have the same problem. At first I thought it might of been a virus or something so I backed up my important data and re-installed. I am now having the same problem. Disabling XML has helped a bit but it's still not performing very well. I haven't had this problem up until this week. Maby some update made the search go bad? Please fix this issue. Release the fix as soon as you have one. I'm betting this is happening to a lot of people right now and they don't know whats going on.
    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 2:07 AM
  •  Eric Wolz - MSFT wrote:
    Try and disabling the .XML file extension from being indexed in the Indexing Options control panel.

     

    this worked perfectly, now my comp is burning a casual 18% CPU, thanks man!

    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 4:21 AM
  • Just wanted to get in on the mix here.  I'm actually running XP Pro SP2 with the Windows Live toolbar installed including the indexing features.  I've just recently begun getting this crazy CPU usage from searchfilterhost.exe and searchprotocolhost.exe and came across this thread.

     

    My indexing icon actually still tells me it's reduced because the system is in use, however, the CPU usage of searchfilterhost.exe is 60% or more, not to mention it's chewing up about 40MB of RAM or more.

    I just now disabled .xml extensions from my indexing options so it's gonna reindex now, I guess.  We'll see what happens.  This is very annoying, though.  It's making my fans go insane!

    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 6:09 AM
  • Actually, now I've closed the windows live indexing stuff but these processes are still going crazy.  I end them and they come back instantly.  Now it's chewing up 225MB of RAM!  Is this really a Windows thing..???
    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 6:19 AM
  • Can somebody please tell me how to just shut down this service.  I see one Indexing Service in MMC but that isn't turned on.  I confirmed that by checking the services list and it does not show started.  I only see one other thing that says anything about indexing, NMIndexingService, and that was started.  I stopped it but those processes are still going crazy.

     

    I can't work with this.  My system is going crazy and it's a nice system.  What service do I need to shut down to stop this?

    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 6:29 AM
  • Eric's fix definately does the trick, wonder how many people are having this problem and not even realising?
    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 3:21 PM
  • does it take awhile for it to stop after you remove .xml from the list?  I did that and those processes were still going insane for 20 min afterwards.  I did find the service that was causing it...called Windows Search.  I've simply shut it down for now.  I'd like to keep it on but I'm afraid to try it again.
    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 3:48 PM
  • We are working with the Apple iTunes development team on this issue and this will be fixed in the next release of iTunes. My best recommendation right now is to disable indexing .XML file extensions.
    Tuesday, April 24, 2007 11:20 PM
  • Thanks, Eric. This also worked for me on an XP system.
    Wednesday, April 25, 2007 1:46 AM
  • I keep seeing information about iTunes on this matter, however, I do not have iTunes installed.  I do have QuickTime installed, but I got the one that did NOT include iTunes.  I double checked my Program Files folder and I have nothing to do with Apple or iTunes.

     

    Figured I better throw that out there...

    Wednesday, April 25, 2007 3:27 AM
  • Someone asked why this is happening. In short we are doing indexing.

     

    In particular the iTunes library is stored in the My Music\iTunes\iTunes Music Library.xml file. It's an XML file and it's in one of the locations we index by default. If you have a very large music library it can take a fairly long time to parse this file and index it. This file gets modified frequently when you are using iTunes {in particular I think the play counts get updated every time you play a track}, and each time the file gets updated then search will reindex it. So this can end up taking a lot of CPU.

     

    So you can disable the indexing of the contents of XML files in the way Eric described. I believe also if you right click on the file, select properties -> Advanced, there's an "Index this File for Faster Searching" option which you could deselect which should have a similar effect.

     

    We are looking into ways we can speed up or avoid this issue in the future.

     

    And as always, Windows Search does indexing using low-priority threads, and if it detects keyboard or mouse usage on the machine or other resource-intensive actions it "backs-off" and lower its resource usage {and on Vista also uses low-priority IO}. So I would hope this wouldn't make your machine ususable.

     

    Dave Wood

     

     

    Wednesday, April 25, 2007 6:04 PM
  •  

    Dave,

     

    "So I would hope this wouldn't make your machine ususable."

     

    That's the rub. It DOES make the machine unusable. Completely, totally, unusable. I am pegging out at 100% and I don't even use iTunes (but I do a lot of visual studio / SQL Server Integration Services, which is also stored as xml). searchfilterhost.exe and searchprotocolhost.exe are always the two top offenders in task manager.

     

    Thanks for looking into it. This is a REAL problem.

     

    Regards

    Saturday, April 28, 2007 4:56 AM
  • I stopped the Windows Search service on my machine and that completely stopped those 2 processes from running at all.  I can actually use my computer like normal again.  So you might just do that for now.  I'm just gonna wait until I hear this is fixed I guess.

    Again, though, I'm running XP Pro SP2 with Windows Live Deskbar installed.  Exact same problem as all of you are experiencing, though.  And I don't have iTunes installed.
    Saturday, April 28, 2007 5:15 AM
  • "And as always, Windows Search does indexing using low-priority threads, and if it detects keyboard or mouse usage on the machine or other resource-intensive actions it "backs-off" and lower its resource usage {and on Vista also uses low-priority IO}. So I would hope this wouldn't make your machine ususable."

    Well it must be broken because even when I'm working the thing kicks in and takes up 100%. I don't even have iTunes installed and it still takes up 100%. Anyway, I have disabled Windows search until this gets fixed.

    Saturday, April 28, 2007 5:14 PM
  • I've followed your directions...but the problem is not solved. SearchFilterHost.exe, SearchProtocolHost.exe and SearchIndexer.exe are now relaced with "windows waiting program" or something its called which says there's 90% free procesortime but still my music laggs and the system alltogheter laggs...i'm not amused...
    Monday, April 30, 2007 10:56 AM
  • Another question - there are 4 file extensions within indexing that are labeled as XML extensions. Should all be turned off?
    Thursday, May 10, 2007 2:27 PM
  • Hey Guys

     

    I got one solution from the web, I just repested the reply from other org. I applied the same, and seems working.

     

    re: iPods and SearchFilterHost.exe
    Wednesday, April 4, 2007 at 10:46 pm
    Windows Vista Annoyances Discussion Forum
    Posted by sinnerman (1 messages posted)


    Hopefully by now you've already solved your problem, but if not, there is one thing you can do: Disable the indexing of xml files by going to Indexing Options in the Control Panel and then clicking the Advanced button. iTunes uses temporary xml files that it updates constantly while it's running, and Vista is forced to re-index them continuously. Obviously you might not want to disable the indexing of all xml files (I certainly didn't), but doing so will solve your problem. I suppose you could also just exclude the folder where iTunes saves those files.

    Saturday, May 12, 2007 1:43 AM
  • I just unchecked the reindex location for the "iTunes Music Library.xml" file. Beautiful, CPU usage down to 1-4% from 40-60%.  Anyway, will this action affect iTunes playback performance or is the index only used by Windows to faster return search results ? Please shed some light.....Thanks.

    Monday, May 14, 2007 1:57 AM
  • The index is only used to return faster search results, so stopping indexing the iTunes library file shouldn't have any effect on the behavior of the iTunes app itself.
    Wednesday, May 16, 2007 12:12 AM
  • Noob question; How do you disable indexing of specific folders?
    Disabling .XML indexing works, but then resets after 10 minutes or so..?
    Sunday, May 20, 2007 1:28 AM
  • All,

     

    Similar thread of the SearchIndexer.exe having similar problem and has some other info not listed here could be worth a try also. 

     

    Check the thread out here:

    http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=1671817&SiteID=1&mode=1

     

    Wayne Drury

    Thursday, May 31, 2007 8:48 AM
  • This is also wreaking havoc with World of Warcraft players, as the majority of the game's interface capabilities relies heavily on XML integration.  I'm honestly surprised there hasn't been more of an uproar from that community given its size.
    Sunday, June 3, 2007 2:10 PM
  • searchfilterhost.exe was killing me !! But I finally beat it back thanks to the XML related suggestions in this message (removing my iTunes library file from the indexing path).

     

    but now searchfilter's evil cousin has arrived on the scene and is eating up just as much CPU as searchfilter was before.

     

    Is there a similar solution for solving the CPU problem caused by cidaemon.exe ?

     

    Thanks!

    Sunday, July 15, 2007 1:38 AM
  • CiDaemon.exe is part of the "legacy" Indexing Service. This is what you get on XP if you go to Start -> Search and go to the built-in Search Pane preferences and select the "Yes, Enable the Indexing Service" option. On XP if you are using Windows Desktop Search I would strongly recommend disabling the legacy Indexing Service {this can be done in the search preferences as above or through the Services control panel, for example}. CiDaemon.exe is not used at all by Windows Desktop Search.

     

    On Vista the legacy Indexing Service is also available but not installed by default. If you want to remove or add it you can do so in the "Turn windows Features On or Off" section in the Control Panel.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Monday, July 16, 2007 7:40 PM
  • Can anyone explain why Vista's searchfilterhost.exe frequently calls home (to Microsoft @ 131.107.115.28)?

     

    Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:33 PM
  • Hello Captain!
    I have the same problem: searchfilterhost.exe is trying to access internet almost each day, several times. I block it, but I would like Microsoft to explain why it's doing it, and what kind of information it's trying to send.
    If you got some explanations about it, please post...
    Thanks.
    (I'm running Vista Business)
    Saturday, August 18, 2007 9:38 PM
  • Strange. There no code I'm aware of in SearchFilterHost.exe that does any networking at all. The only thing I can think of is that the process is crashing and a Windows Error Reporting report is being sent.

     

    Note also that SearchFilterHosts loads any IFilters that are registered for specific file extensions {listed in the Indexing Control Panel -> Advanced -> File Types}, which includes IFilters both from Microsoft and 3rd party products - e.g. if you install Adobe Reader you get an IFilter installed from Adobe which filters .PDF files, and this will run in SearchFilterHost.exe.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Sunday, August 19, 2007 5:58 PM
  • Hi:

     

    I recently installed the latest version of Windows Desktop Search on my XP SP2 laptop. Big mistake. The three search processes SearchFilterHost, protocol and index take turns gobbling up 100% of my CPU. Biggest offender seems to be SearchFilterHost.exe.

     

    I also have CilDaemon.exe showing up as using processor time.

     

    I did disable all the various versions of .xml under Search Indexing on the Control Panel. I do not see how to disable iTunes indexing in XP. And I do not see how to disable Services in XP, such as CilDaemon.

     

    Can you give me step-by-step instructions for how to disable those in XP?

     

    Am afraid I overwrote my old version of WDS or I would reinstall it. It never did this. I really depend upon WDS but will have to kill it if I can't get my processor to run adequately with it. I know that it is SUPPOSED to only be active when the computer is idle.... and it even says that it is paused when I hover the cursor over it. Yet SearchFilterHost.exe is using 98% to 100% of my cpu... Why?

     

    Thanks in advance for taking the time to help me get this working on an XP Home, SP2 machine.

     

    For me, the issue is not my iPod, as I haven't used it on this computer. It's just the new WDS.

    Monday, August 20, 2007 7:45 PM
  • Well the first problem I see is that you are running TWO indexers - the old XP indexing service {CiDaemon.exe} and the WDS one {SearchIndexer.exe}. So first I would disable the old indexing service by going to search and clicking the option to bring up the old "animated dog" search window and set the "Do not enable indexing service option".

     

    After that I would see if the Indexing Options Control Panel ever reports that the index is up to date - it may take a few hours to initially build the index. If the count of items indexed keeps increasing then it is making progress. If the count of items is not increasing and the indexing never completes then some other problem is happening which we will need to diagnose further.

     

    Dave Wood

    Monday, August 20, 2007 8:31 PM
  • Eric, this is searchfilterhost.exe related but not resource related.

    Perhaps you you explain why searchfilterhost.exe wants to phone home to MS (131.107.115.28) so often.  Using Vista Home Premium with AVG Internet security (which identified the issue)?

     

    Thursday, August 23, 2007 2:05 PM
  • Hello,

     

    I also installed the Windows Desktop Search on my XP SP2 laptop.  After trying all the suggestions posted in this thread, I am still getting close to 100% CPU usage and close to 1GB of memory usage by searchfilterhost.exe.  I don't have iTune installed and I turned off xml indexing.

     

    The performance issue is extremely annoying when running on battery.  searchfilterhost.exe will fired up all of a sudden until the battery is dead.  It seems that the indexer is active even when you are running on battery.  I am wondering if there is a way to set the indexer such that it will deactivate when the laptop is running on battery?

     

    Anyway, the followings are some of the relevant setup of my laptop in case they help with the diagnosis:

     

    1 physical harddrive with 2 partitions (C: and D: )

     

    persistant samba connection to a Sun server

     

    The "Documents and Settings" folder is located in drive D:

     

    On logon, there is a script that will map the My Document folder to a drive using:

    subst H: "%USERPROFILE%\My Documents"  (I don't know if this would mess up the indexer or not, but on logout it would be unmapped)

     

    The following software are installed:

    Outlook 2007 (IMAP connection to the email server)

    OneNote 2007

    Symantec Antivirus

    O&O Defrag

    Friday, September 7, 2007 4:12 PM
  •  

    One thing that may be of general interest is that the issue related to iTunes and XML files should be resolved by downloading the latest version of iTunes. In the latest version the XML library file is no longer marked to have its content indexed so you should not see any perf isssues between Windows Search and iTunes any more.

     

    Joshua, it definitely is SearchFilterHost.exe that is using the excess cpu & memory and not the other search processes? My suspicion is one particular document on your drive is causing the indexer to get into an infinite loop. After a couple of minutes the search service should notice this and terminate the process but until that point you would see 100% CPU. However it's not easy for me to remotely investigate what is happening. I was about to suggest taking a dump file of the SearchFilterHost process through TaskManager and sending it to me, but I think that option is only available on Vista {if you happen to be familiar with using a debugger like windbg to do this then go for it ...}

    Friday, September 7, 2007 9:12 PM
  • Hi Dave,

     

    Thanks very much for all your posts and info on this thread. I just today discovered this thread after googling "searchfilterhost.exe". Thankfully. I have been looking for the root cause of these issues for months. I have been growing increasingly concerned about this issue because it is not only affecting my home machine (Vista Business with itunes and pretty much nothing else.) but also all the Vista Business clients at my company (none have iTunes) and our Win 2003 servers. My company is a consulting firm that specialises in Msft Sharepoint, Msft BI and other BI such as Oracle | Hyperion and Outlooksoft. all these software server applications keep xml files that are continuously updated. This issue seems to have a big impact not only on Vista clients but also these server apps. (Essbase, Moss, PerformancePoint, etc.) Especially MOSS 2007. It is no small issue. I have done your suggestion (eliminating search of all .xml files) and this helps quite a bit.

     

    Its a  relief to know it is not a bug in the indexing sevice but rather a configuration issue. But - is it possible come up with some configuration wizards or even better yet, an indexing usage diagnostic program that can be run which will help identify infintite loops and problematic files? This would really help to eliminate the issues and also make the search more reliable across the entire platform.

     

    Thanks Again for the info.

     

    Nick

     

    Sunday, September 9, 2007 4:25 AM
  • I have been experiencing the same issue, and followed the advice I found on this forum, but to no avail.  I disabled the XML files and exited the Control Panel.  My CPU usage is stil way up there and the culprit is still "searchfilterhost.exe". I reopened my Control Panel and the "xml" files were checked again.  This time I went through the entire list and disabled perhaps 15-20 file types, mostly "gamesave" types that I don't use, as well as the "xml" files.  I exited and watched my task manager resources and searchfilterhost.exe was still sucking up 35-50%.  I once again opened the indexing options, and all the other files types were still unchecked, but the "xml" files were checked again.  I unchecked them once again, went to task manager and tried to "end process" the searchfilterhost.ext and the other index related files, but I would click on "end process" and it would shut off and then pop right back up again.

     

    This is very frustrating. 

    Is there a fix for this yet?   I see these posts started 8 months ago.

    Jeff

     

    Wednesday, October 17, 2007 10:08 PM
  • How do I access the Indexing options control panel?

     

    Monday, October 22, 2007 2:36 PM
  •  

    The Indexing Options is in the Control Panel, under the System category.

     

    For the person who is seeing SearchFilterHost.exe using 100% CPU, if you are on Vista you can right-click on the process in TaskManager, select "Create Dump File" and mail it to me or put it somewhere I can access: davewood at microsoft dot com . That way I can try to debug it.

    Thursday, October 25, 2007 6:38 PM
  • I too have been having problems w/ searchfilterhost.exe & its cousins.  I tried several of the suggestions w/o any improvement on a duo core system w/ 2GB of memory running XP w/ SP2.  The programs took over the computer to the exclusion of all other activity for long periods of time--10 minutes to 90 minutes.  The problem manifested itself everytime I started Outlook 2007 (note: this problem doesn't occur in Outlook 2003).  So I turned off the indexing of the personal folder &, viola, the out of control harddrive activity stopped & I regained control.

     

    To stop the indexing:  Select Tools, Instant Search, Search Options, & uncheck the Indexing of the Personal Folders.  I don't know what the long term effect will be, but at least I don't have a 5 pound brick on my desk anymore.

     

    What is especially annoying about this problem is that Google desktop does a better & faster job searching.  Microsoft should license that technology instead of trying to reinvent the wheel.  How many hours have been wasted waiting for the search*.exe programs to yield control back to the user?  How about the time spent trying to solve the problem?

    Wednesday, October 31, 2007 6:01 AM
  • I've read all the related threads and I have no similar problem. I run a dual boot XP-Pro and Vista Ultimate. I have much the same configuration as many others.

    Windows Vista Ultimate (x64) (build 6000)

    2.47 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core

    2048 Megabytes Installed Memory

    NVIDIA STRIPE 465.77G [Hard drive] (500.11 GB) ...This, I think, is the difference. This is a SATA3.

     

    While I'm using the indexing service, it's running on SATA3 drives in RAID 0 configuration.

    I have never had this problem.

     

    What do you think?

     

    Saturday, November 10, 2007 12:26 AM
  • Sorry if I've missed it, but a couple of people were asking how to disable/alter running services in XP. Whilst most forum users here probably know already, I arrived here via a google search, as others may have.

    Anyway, glad to be corrected if there is a better way to do it, but I click start, run, then type in SERVICES.MSC , then OK.
    Friday, November 23, 2007 10:41 AM
  • I'm really getting sick of this.  I'm on XP with WDS 3.1.  searchfilterhost will rachet up its memory consumption to 2200MB (yes, twenty-two hundred MB).  Then it will drop back down to 10-15MB, but the commit charge stays at around 2900MB (out of 3900MB).  If I have the Index Status box open, I can see that it has 5-10 items to process.  The commit charge stays at 2900MB+ until I kill the searchfilterhost task, or until it completes processing those items.

    I've turned off XML processing, but I only process Outlook, anyway (I have removed all folders from WDS).
    Thursday, December 20, 2007 9:15 PM
  • I know the recommendation is to stop indexing XML files, but I am wondering whether this is really going to help much with the Office 2007 applications installed. I noticed that the new extensions (xlsx, pptx, docx) and their various permutations are enabled in the indexer as well (along with Outlook Express).

     

    Since the newer document files from MSO 2007 are more XML-like, doesn't this imply that have those files types enabled will also contribute to the problem with the indexer?

     

    I have been able to track down various issues with CPU loading/system hangs to the indexer process on my XP SP2

    fully-patched system.  It is frustrating to disable the service to avoid the behavior, when I have a need for such a tool in my WIndows environment (spotlite on MAC is the best!).

     

    Lot's of folks have asked, and there have been some suggestions from Microsoft staff, but to date, no one is even trying to offer a potential DATE when this problem might be solved, or even some beta bits for those of us willing to see if they are making any progress in finding a real solution.

     

    Wednesday, January 2, 2008 6:26 PM
  • Let's be careful here. The original issue reported {and the recommended work-around to disable indexing of .xml files} was related to a very specific set of circumstances, where playing tracks using a certain version of iTunes with a large music library would trigger high CPU usage in SearchFilterHost.exe. If you use the latest update of iTunes you shouldn't see this specific issue any more as the iTunes music library .xml file is now marked to not be indexed. This issue also shouldn't have any impact on Office 2007 files like .docx as they are indexed with an Office-specific filter, not the XML filter used for .xml file extensions.

     

    So if you are seeing high-CPU issues in indexer processes I'd like to get more details if you can reproduce these issues. We are actively investigating reliability and performance issues in the indexer so any specific details you have on problems you are seeing would be really helpful.

     

    Dave Wood

     

     

     

    Monday, January 7, 2008 6:18 AM
  • I am still wanting an answer to this;

     

    "Can anyone explain why Vista's searchfilterhost.exe frequently calls home (to Microsoft @ 131.107.115.28)?"

     

    I am having this happen and I don't have itunes.

    I know it was suggested that maybe it was trying to report an error, but if that is the case why am I not getting the "hey wanna report this error" message?

     

    I did try to install the upgrade advisor which told me it had an issue and I might want to uninstall and reinstall. I did that and it still would not work. Any corelation?

     

     

    Wednesday, January 23, 2008 12:28 PM
  •  DaveWood_MS wrote:

    So if you are seeing high-CPU issues in indexer processes I'd like to get more details if you can reproduce these issues. We are actively investigating reliability and performance issues in the indexer so any specific details you have on problems you are seeing would be really helpful.

     

    Dave Wood



    I run XP Pro SP2 on a Dell Latitude D620 w/ 2GB RAM, but I have replicated this on an eMachines T3025 with 1GB RAM (and XP Pro SP2).

    I use Outlook 2007 and Exchange over HTTP, so my primary storage file is an OST.  If that is all there is, then it works fine.  However, if I add another large PST (~300MB), the Task Manager shows searchfilterhost consume 2GB+ of memory for a while, then drop down to ~10MB.  However, the Commit Charge doesn't decrease for a while (10-60 minutes).  If I terminate the searchfilterhost process, then the Commit Charge drops down appropriately and after a couple of minutes I can use my PC again normally.  However, the next time searchfilterhost fires up - I get the same problem.

    Removing the large PST from the WDS options fixes the problem.
    Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:59 PM
  • I did what everyone said, this means removing the .xml extension from the indexing options, but nothing helped. I really think that it's about time that Microsoft should fix this problem. I am using Windows Vista Ultimate on Dell inspiron 1521 with AMD AThlon x2 64 bit processor. If someone else has another sugestion please reply
    Tuesday, January 29, 2008 7:54 PM
  • Dimov,

     

    Is it definitely SearchFilterHost.exe that is using large amounts of CPU on your machine? Note that there are cases when this process will be busy indexing {for example after doing a lot of file operations in your Documents directory or connecting to a new Outlook mailbox}. But the process should run at a low priority so any other processes should take precedence for CPU, disc etc.

     

    If there's a scenario where SearchFilterHost.exe is using large amounts of CPU for long periods then I would suggest taking a minidump of the process that I can use to do some debugging. To do this right-click on the process in Task Manager and select "Create Dump File". Then you can e-mail {or more likely put on a web server somewhere} to me at "davewood at microsoft dot com".

     

    We are doing a lot of work to improve the performance and reliability of Windows Search. If I could get a solid repro of the issue you are seeing it would be awesome to investigate this. Otherwise it's very hard to debug these issues without a dump file or other solid repro.

     

    Note: I wouldn't generally recommend disabling indexing of .xml files anymore. The issues we found where iTunes and Windows Desktop Search were interacting badly should be resolved in the latest version of iTunes.

     

     

    Dave Wood

    Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:46 AM
  •  

    My co-worker Josh did some investigations on this {see thread here: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2072389&SiteID=1 }

     

    Our conclusions were:

    - SearchFilterHost.exe isn't actually accessing the network because it runs in a sandbox and it doesn't have permissions to do so. The firewall is probably triggering on an attempt to make a connection rather than an actual connection being made. Internally we tried this out with a network monitor and verified this.

    - In the case Josh looked at, the attempt to access the network was made as part of indexing jpeg files. The jpeg rendering code was attempting to check for an updated codec or something similar.

     

    Generally there's no code directly in SearchFilterHost.exe that accesses the network. But SearchFilterHost.exe is designed to load IFilters for different file types to do indexing, and these IFilters can be installed with other Microsoft or 3rd party products so it's hard for us to state exactly what is happening in any running instance of SearchFilterHost.exe. In fact that's why we run the IFilters in a separate process with low-rights.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:42 PM
  •  DaveWood_MS wrote:

    If there's a scenario where SearchFilterHost.exe is using large amounts of CPU for long periods then I would suggest taking a minidump of the process that I can use to do some debugging. To do this right-click on the process in Task Manager and select "Create Dump File". Then you can e-mail {or more likely put on a web server somewhere} to me at "davewood at microsoft dot com".

     

    Hi Dave

    I am on a XP Sp2 - how do i send a minidump for debug to you (no create dump file)

     

    SearchFilterHost.exe is using 30% - 50% of CPU. This is a big problem for me since i neeed all the power i can get from the CPU to my main work program; Solidworks 2008.

     

    Thanks & Best regards

    Thomas

    Wednesday, March 5, 2008 9:45 AM
  •  

    On XP doing this requires you have a debugger installed. You could install the Microsoft debugging tools from http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/devtools/debugging/installx86.mspx and then run:

    windbg.exe -pn SearchFilterHost.exe

    Then you can run the command:

    .dump /mf c:\temp\searchfilterhost.dmp

    from inside the windbg command window to create the dump file and can send to me {or more likely upload to web storage}.

     

    Unfortunately, using windbg is not for the faint-of-heart. On Vista this can be done directly through Task Manager which is a lot simpler.

     

    Dave

    Tuesday, March 11, 2008 10:33 PM
  •  ZakMahshie wrote:
     DaveWood_MS wrote:

    So if you are seeing high-CPU issues in indexer processes I'd like to get more details if you can reproduce these issues. We are actively investigating reliability and performance issues in the indexer so any specific details you have on problems you are seeing would be really helpful.

     

    Dave Wood



    I run XP Pro SP2 on a Dell Latitude D620 w/ 2GB RAM, but I have replicated this on an eMachines T3025 with 1GB RAM (and XP Pro SP2).

    I use Outlook 2007 and Exchange over HTTP, so my primary storage file is an OST.  If that is all there is, then it works fine.  However, if I add another large PST (~300MB), the Task Manager shows searchfilterhost consume 2GB+ of memory for a while, then drop down to ~10MB.  However, the Commit Charge doesn't decrease for a while (10-60 minutes).  If I terminate the searchfilterhost process, then the Commit Charge drops down appropriately and after a couple of minutes I can use my PC again normally.  However, the next time searchfilterhost fires up - I get the same problem.

    Removing the large PST from the WDS options fixes the problem.


    You asked for details, which I provided.  Were you able to replicate this?
    Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:39 AM
  • Interesting. When indexing MAPI items the only thing SearchFilterHost.exe is used for is to filter message bodies and attachments. I wonder if there's an extremely large message or attachment that could be triggering this. You're sure this is SearchFilterHost.exe and not SearchProtocolHost.exe right? Note having an extremely large Commit Charge in SearchFilterHost.exe shouldn't necessarily be a problem - do you find this is interfering with your usage of the machine?

     

    Also if you leave the system running {without terminating the process} does the system eventually return to normal?

    Wednesday, March 12, 2008 5:30 PM
  • I don't know if this is going to appear on the forum, or reply to HeloCaptain.

    Just like HeloCaptain, I to would like to know why searchfilterhost.exe is trying to access the internet to 131.107.115.28. What is is doing?

    As I don't know what it is doing, I have denied the action, even to make it remember my decision permanantly, but guess what it still pops up.

    Microsoft, what are you up to and what part of our privacy are you invading, is this spyware????

    MotherP
    Friday, March 14, 2008 1:26 AM
  • I have invoked the "deny access" permanently feature as well.

     

    MS seems to not just be silent on this issue, they actively ignore inquiries.

     

    Strange (then again, it is MS).

     

    It is strange that even a Google search has failed to locate an answer to this issue as well.

     

    If you ever find out, please post here.

     

    Thanks.

    Friday, March 14, 2008 2:45 AM
  •  DaveWood_MS wrote:

    Interesting. When indexing MAPI items the only thing SearchFilterHost.exe is used for is to filter message bodies and attachments. I wonder if there's an extremely large message or attachment that could be triggering this. You're sure this is SearchFilterHost.exe and not SearchProtocolHost.exe right? Note having an extremely large Commit Charge in SearchFilterHost.exe shouldn't necessarily be a problem - do you find this is interfering with your usage of the machine?

     

    Also if you leave the system running {without terminating the process} does the system eventually return to normal?



    Yes, it's definitely SearchFilterHost.  It's not the Commit Charge for SearchFilterHost that stays high - it's the total Commit Charge that stays high.  And, yes, it renders my machine completely unusable until I terminate the SearchFilterHost process. 
    Friday, March 14, 2008 3:31 AM
  • Earlier in this thread I posted a response on this firewall issue. In short, this is not spyware and SearchFilterHost.exe isn't really communicating with Microsoft servers:

     

    >>>>

     

    My co-worker Josh did some investigations on this {see thread here: http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=2072389&SiteID=1 }

     

    Our conclusions were:

    - SearchFilterHost.exe isn't actually accessing the network because it runs in a sandbox and it doesn't have permissions to do so. The firewall is probably triggering on an attempt to make a connection rather than an actual connection being made. Internally we tried this out with a network monitor and verified this.

    - In the case Josh looked at, the attempt to access the network was made as part of indexing jpeg files. The jpeg rendering code was attempting to check for an updated codec or something similar.

     

    Generally there's no code directly in SearchFilterHost.exe that accesses the network. But SearchFilterHost.exe is designed to load IFilters for different file types to do indexing, and these IFilters can be installed with other Microsoft or 3rd party products so it's hard for us to state exactly what is happening in any running instance of SearchFilterHost.exe. In fact that's why we run the IFilters in a separate process with low-rights.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    >>>>

    Friday, March 14, 2008 8:29 PM
  • Microsoft will soon be, if not already, working with the Feds.
    Sunday, March 30, 2008 12:01 PM
  • Why is there not a simple remove program for this 'quad' of offenders... the Office 2007 Suite loads this 'quad' of useless features as well... the search*.exe's are a joke at best! Search Companion is still there any way and is much faster!

     

    It is a PAIN in the backside and simply M$ spying as far as I can see... there is definately a reporting protocol and link to Live Search as well... the whole thing is rediculously taxing on a PC... not necessary and a waste of CPU & memory...

     

    Remove it or give us all an uninstall instead of an *.xml stop function work around! This is like the snmp, cisv.exe, and 8-10 other CPU wasting bits of code included from Microsoft to report back processes (Microsoft Spyware~!!!)and internet activities. They are simply means to slow or bog down a system and totally unecessary from a user's perspective! When will Microsoft start listening to its user base and build an operating system that is clean, virus free and not designed to choke all its process information through a 1.5+ megabyte straw by opening the flow with this type of nonsense software inclusion to make it even worse?

     

    Monday, April 7, 2008 6:07 AM
  •  

     

    - Are you using Vista or XP? On XP you can uninstall Windows Desktop Search through Add/Remove Programs. On either Vista or XP you can disable the Windows Search service in the Services control panel. Either approach will stop any of the search processes from running.

    - Generally, once initial indexing is complete Windows Search should use limited resources. We specifically run the indexing at low priority to reduce load on the system. Some people have reported issues with Windows Search using too many resources on their machine, which I am investigating on this thread.

    - Any performance issues related to iTunes and XML files should be fixed by recent releases of iTunes. In addition the latest preview release of Windows Search 4 offers additional fixes and reliability improvements: { http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/03/27/announcing-the-windows-search-4-0-preview.aspx }

    - There is no spyware in Windows Search, as has been described above and on other postings.

     

    Dave Wood

    Tuesday, April 8, 2008 6:44 PM
  •  

    I disabled the .xml file extension in Indexing Options.  That worked great for about three days.  Now the thing has taken over again.  It is usually over 50% of CPU cycles. - Windows Vista 64Bit machine. 

    I checked the Indexing Options and the check mark is still off next to .xml extension.

     

    Any ideas ???  This makes the computer almost useless.

     

    Thanks.

    Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:01 AM
  • Hi Curtis,

     

    First off, I wouldn't recommend disabling the .xml IFilter extension any longer. As I've mentioned, recent updates of iTunes have a change which will prevent the interaction which was causing the high-CPU when using iTunes.

     

    Secondly, I would suggest installing the preview release of the next version of Windows Search - in this release we have made many reliability and performance improvements to the indexer.This is available for Vista SP1 or XP at: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940157 . Let us know if this resolves the issue.

     

    Thirdly, I would like to understand a bit more what is happening on your machine. As I mentioned before, you could send me a dump file for SearchFilterHost.exe when it is using a large amount of CPU so I can investigate. Also, what is happening in the Indexing Options Control Panel - is the index being rebuilt from scratch, is the count of items increasing or stuck etc? If the index unexpectedly got rebuilt the Event Viewer should have details on this. The indexer processes will use some CPU, especially when the computer is otherwise idle, but it should not interfere with your usage of the machine.

     

    Finally, if all else fails, you can disable the Windows Search service in the Services Control Panel. Of course you lose the ability to do indexed searches at that point, but no search processes will run any more.

     

     

    Dave

     

    Thursday, April 24, 2008 5:28 PM
  • I'm using 32 bit Vista, and searchfilter host is also taking up lots of cpu usage. So I can email the dump file, what was your email address, Dave Wood? Also, for now, how do I prevent the service from starting every time I start my computer? Thanks.
    Saturday, May 17, 2008 11:21 PM
  • His email is davewood at microsoft dot com

     

    I am having the same problem on 2 of my VM's I think it is because they are mapped to a HUGE file server but I have to disable search.  Give it hell Dave....

     

    Thursday, June 12, 2008 11:23 AM
  • I also suffer from the dreaded CPU tax imposed by SearchFilterHost.exe!

     

    It uses about 40-60% CPU all the time, making my machine damn slow.

     

    I did just resintall Vista Business after my BIOS died - so I have a lot of files to index. But still the machine should be usable right?

     

    Can I send you a dump?

    Thursday, June 19, 2008 10:19 AM
  • Hi Dave,

    I also have this cancer, and I run XP Pro64 on a DELL M90.

    I, too, found my way here via google.

    I'd like to send you the minidump, but your instructions on how to create it don't seem to apply to XP Pro64. Can you give me the proper way to do it for this OS and I'd be glad to send you this to help out. This is a hideous problem....especially for a laptop running a big CAD system. It slows everything down to a grinding halt, and even causes problems (slowndowns and hangs) with my CAD system because of the system response issue. Not so funny when you're in the middle of a day's work....

    Rgds,

    Denver

     

    Wednesday, July 9, 2008 4:55 AM
  •  

    Which CAD program are you using?

     

    We have seen issues where the beta Adobe DNG codec appears to cause high CPU in SearchFilterHost.exe.

     

    I've also received reports of the same problem when using the Nikon .NEF codec and the Solidwords 2008 CAD program, although we haven't been able to very that internally.

     

    As always, I'd recommend installing Windows Search 4, our latest release which many relaibility and performance improvements: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/940157

     

    Getting a dump file on XP I think requires a debugger like Visual Studio or WinDBG. I have mainly been using the dump files to see what the call stacks are on the threads in the SearchFilterHost.exe process to try and tell which dlls are using CPU.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Friday, July 11, 2008 12:04 AM
  • hey guys...been reading this thread...i've been having problems with the searchprotocolhost.exe program thingy....it was running two of the same processes in my resource monitor and both were using 1,130,000 kb each...it was running my physical memory usage to 99% most of the time...i unchecked the xml in the indexing options and the problem seemingly went away...is there some reason why searchprotocolhost.exe would run itself twice?

    Thursday, July 24, 2008 2:05 AM
  •  DaveWood_MS wrote:

    Strange. There no code I'm aware of in SearchFilterHost.exe that does any networking at all. The only thing I can think of is that the process is crashing and a Windows Error Reporting report is being sent.

     

    Note also that SearchFilterHosts loads any IFilters that are registered for specific file extensions {listed in the Indexing Control Panel -> Advanced -> File Types}, which includes IFilters both from Microsoft and 3rd party products - e.g. if you install Adobe Reader you get an IFilter installed from Adobe which filters .PDF files, and this will run in SearchFilterHost.exe.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Hello. First thanks for unusual good tone when making posts, DaveWood.

    While I don't have any problems with cpu resources does my SearchFilterHost.exe want to go on internet very often. 

    Judging by your answer does it make me wonder if my machine got serious problems despite my efforts to keep it clean and tidy.

    Only one big and reoccuring problem that I know of, is that Live Gallery hangs (for some time or permanently) if going fast through pictures and changing them. If it does, can it completely freeze the machine, but that is another topic.

    How should I go forth to check what might be the cause? It is all kinds of IPs the SearchFilterHost is trying to reach btw. www.i.google.com and what not.

    Because of your answer will I deny it any access to internet for now. 

    Any guidance on what purpose the access to internet got for SearchFilterHost would be helpful.

    Friday, July 25, 2008 2:23 PM
  • It's totally normal for there to be two instances of SearchProtocolHost.exe running. One is running as the "System" account and is indexing files on your hard-drive. The other is running with the permissions of the logged-on user {you} and indexing things like your Outlook e-mail etc.

     

    But the amount of memory use does not sound normal. I would recommend installing Windows Search 4 if you don't have it already { http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/desktopsearch/choose/windowssearch4.mspx }. If you see problems like this again let me know.

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Friday, July 25, 2008 10:50 PM
  • Actually SearchFilterHost.exe doesn't access the Internet - we deliberately set the process to run with low-permissions for security reasons and it isn't able to connect. But the attempt to connect does appear to trigger some firewalls.

     

    The usual cause of this is when indexing media files, we use the media codecs to pull the media properties about each file. Some versions of these codecs when running in a media player try and connect to download updates, check permissions etc. But in SearchFilterHost.exe they don't do this.

     

     

    Friday, July 25, 2008 10:54 PM
  • I noticed the other day that my Norton activity log indicated

     

    "an instance of SearchFilterHost.exe is preparing to access the internet"

     

    I use a Vista 32bit Home Premium with SP1 and have Norton Antivirus and DSL connection. My comp is on 24/7

    I log on as a User rather than administrator to minimize any undesired downloads

     

    Just like Wednesday 7/23/08 I received sevral Windows updates one of which was

    KB940157 which I beleive is is the search filter 4.0

     

    so my concern is- is this trying or more importantly, accessing the internet? Or does this simply mean that it attempted?

    I read the previous posts which indicated that this process des not automatically access the internet

     

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:15 AM
  •  DaveWood_MS wrote:

    Actually SearchFilterHost.exe doesn't access the Internet - we deliberately set the process to run with low-permissions for security reasons and it isn't able to connect. But the attempt to connect does appear to trigger some firewalls.

     

    The usual cause of this is when indexing media files, we use the media codecs to pull the media properties about each file. Some versions of these codecs when running in a media player try and connect to download updates, check permissions etc. But in SearchFilterHost.exe they don't do this.

     

     

    Thanks for the reply, DaveWood. I am sorry I missed older replies on the same topic and that this is quite off tangent on the main topic of the thread.

    Not knowing quite how those things work, do I interfere negatively with the processes and create a mess by denying SearchFilterHost.exe to access internet (even though you say it doesn't actually reach out for networks of any kind).

    Like, where does SearchFilterHost.exe and/or the codecs/media that you mention, end up when not getting access?

    Does it clutter up in some way?

    Perhaps rather broad question, but always wondered, in general and now specifically about SearchFiltherHost.exe

    Smile

    Saturday, July 26, 2008 12:13 PM
  • i tried installing both of the Vista search updates, but i'm getting an error message saying that the update doesn't apply to my system

     

    Sunday, July 27, 2008 3:34 PM
  •  

    I don't think it makes a huge difference either way whether you deny or allow remote connections for SearchFilterHost.exe. I don't believe you will break anything or cause a problem - although I am not familiar with exactly what your firewall is doing.

     

    Dave

    Monday, July 28, 2008 7:52 PM
  •  Eric Wolz - MSFT wrote:
    Try and disabling the .XML file extension from being indexed in the Indexing Options control panel.

     

    Typical, WORTHLESS Microsoft Moderator response. Yah? WHERE IS THIS Magic Control Panel?

     

    Please ELABORATE: WHERE is the Index Options Control Panel? Please state the quickest way to access it, or, shut up.

     

    It is a worthless answer anyway, as, when I open the "Indexing Options Control Panel, it states pretty clearly:

     

    "INDEXING IS NOT RUNNING"

     

    But those 3 processes are happily running at 80% CPU and Memory usage, will NOT shut off or STAY shut off, and it is STILL pi$$ing me off.

     

    Please, stop developing "Fixes" for this garbage... Show us how to RIP IT OUT of Vista and give us a search fucntion that WORKS.

     

    Vista Search is about the worst search EVER please show us how to delete it.

     

    I found a semi-solution HERE:

     

    http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/topic133439.html

     

    The guy says, just go to SERVICES and SHUT OFF the Windows Search service.

     

    When you do... If you try to SEARCH something, the NAG-Bar in Windows Explorer instantly notifies you that you have to click the bar to start the indexing service else the search will be SLOW.

     

    That is NOT so, it actually works better with the indexer shut off.

    Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:45 PM
  • This did the trick for me also.  Microsoft needs to make this the default to NOT have xlm files indexed.

    Thursday, September 4, 2008 3:59 PM
  • Certainly, I'm still having problems with this. I'd never experienced it before this afternoon and I don't use iTunes (I do have it installed and have used it once but I've not been listening to music from my PC today).

    I'm running XP SP2 and had to kill the process in Task Manager (which took over 60 seconds to launch), as one of the search processes was using 2GB of memory. I've disabled XML files and, then, the service itself, given I rarely use indexed search anyways.

    Whilst disabling the serive is likely to solve the problem for now, I guess I should probably find a "proper" solution… Smile
    Thursday, September 11, 2008 2:16 PM
  • Thanks Eric!

     

    Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:57 AM
  •  

     

    If you are using the latest Windows Search 4.0 release, and/or a recent update of iTunes, then this issue is very unlikely to be related to XML files. The most common reason we've seen for this recently is a beta version of the Abode DNG Codec which could cause SearchFilterHost.exe to use 100% CPU when processing .dng files.

     

    I would recommend upgrading to the latest version of Windows Search {Windows Search 4.0} if you have not already dome so { http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/desktopsearch/choose/windowssearch4.mspx }. Note also that Windows Search will use some CPU while it is initially rebuilding the index after upgrade.

     

    If people are using Windows Vista and are seeing this behavior you can also send me a minidump file which I can use to investigate further {right-click on SearchFilterHost.exe in Task Manager and pick "Create Dump File"}.

     

    Dave Wood

    Developer, Windows Search

    Monday, September 22, 2008 10:08 PM
  • Eric, that was awasome. It works much better now!!!!!
    I have my computer back!!

    Who needs that indexer that was eating 50% of my CPU????

    Not me!!!!!!
    Tuesday, September 30, 2008 1:33 PM
  • THANKS ERIC!!!!
    Tuesday, September 30, 2008 1:37 PM
  • I am not very good on the computer, can you tell me HOW to disable the .XML file extension in the Indexing Options panel and how do I find the Indexing options panel?

    Monday, October 6, 2008 7:09 AM
  • Audrey,

     

    I would not recommend changing any settings at this point - {some of the advice in this thread is quite old and not quite appropriate anymore}. I would make sure you are using the latest version of Windows Search {available on Windows update or at http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/desktopsearch/choose/windowssearch4.mspx }. Which OS are you using? If you are using Vista I would recommend upgrading to SP1 {similarly SP3 for XP}.

     

    Can you explain in a bit more detail what issues are you seeing with search?

     

    Dave Wood

     

    Tuesday, October 7, 2008 2:32 AM
  • Hi Dave,

    Re our searchfilterhost.exe problem & the windowssearch4.mspx program.

    This morning my PC started with this problem searchfilterhost.exe problem after spending many hours trying to locate a fix I found in this forum that the immediate "workaround" was to access the services.msc area for Windows Search Services & to stop the program running.

    I use Vista 32 with SP1. The only thing that I was doing with my PC last night was trying to remove Java for a website fix which involved (as per recommendation) removing all appearances of Java as per recommendation:

    <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
    <!--[endif]-->

    "C:\Program Files\Java"

    "C:\Program Files\Common Files\Java"

    "C:\Users\%username%\Application Data\Sun"


    The first line went okay
    The 2nd found nothing there to delete
    The 3rd line didn't exist under that directory structure, but "hidden as"
    "C:\Users\%username%\AppData\LocalLow\Sun"

    Upon accidentally un-hiding this directory area I started to unintentionally hiding my entire user directory, which I created.

    Upon reloading new Java program it appears this indexing/search fault appeared.

    I note that the apps directory whilst hidden still has a indexing tick checked, should this be the case (I couldn't uncheck).

    I wonder if this is a cause of the indexing problem which for me is using up 50% of my resources & driving my HD hard.

    Also this new program of MS that you mention:
    windowssearch4.mspx a new optional add-on that overrides the troublesome searchfilterhost.exe & searchndexer.exe programs?


    Does
    the windowssearch4.mspx program install any other unwanted programs onto my PC?

    I would welcome your reply.

    Best regards

    Ewan



    Wednesday, October 15, 2008 3:17 AM
  • I have this problem, and it is very annoying! I have Vista Business SP1. I cannot see it in Task manager, but if I go to Ressource monitor then I can see SearchFilterHost.exe and it often takes up more than 50% of my CPU (2,4GHz). My computer is brand new (less than a week old) and it just started yesterday. yesterday I downloaded WinAmp and Itunes, can this be the cause. It is very annoying that when my computer is iddling the cpu goes between 15% and 50% all the time!!!

    Now it even started sometimes showing SearchFilterHost.exe twice in ressource monitor :-s

     

     

    Wednesday, October 15, 2008 10:31 AM
  •  

    cool
    Friday, October 17, 2008 9:17 AM
  • My understanding of searchfilterhost.exe is that it is effectually a webcrawler for my own personal computer.  Why do I want this?  Asside from the fact that if I dissable it things stop working...  Why do we want this worm crawling around our computer?  Why can't I disable it and still have my other systems work?  Because faster computers have to be needed...

     

    I have gotten in the habit of snoozing my indexing for 12 hours first thing every day when I get on my machine.  I am sure the corporate shared drives aren't properly adminstrated in the network and the search tables are perpetually rebuilding.  If I disable indexing completely I loose the ability to search through my e-mails in Outlook which are on the network.  Bottom line the IT department isn't supporting this because they want new 2008 servers and can't do anything without the latest of everything.  Why can't I go back to the way things were prior to the instalation of what I considder a M$ planted virus on my system?  I didn't mind spending 30 seconds to search when I am trying to find some specific file but loosing 30+% of my computer all the time is rediculious.  I have not found one good thing about this new search method being implemented.  It saves me 3 seconds twice a week but I 30% of every processor hour?  What genus decided to do this?  Probably the same one who decided to have every bit of data from a USB go throgh the processor?  When are the Microsoft programmers to get more efficient in their usage of our supercomputers and implement systems that are actual productivity inhancements?  Please get out of bed with Intel, and make an OS that isn't just a bigger stronger version of the previous wastefull beasly programming.  We can't make a bad program better by ladeling on the code and wasting flops.  This is why I still have all my old machines going back to my windows 3.1 running on a Pentium 166.  I have 12 year old programs that run better on old POS workstations than anything comparative on a 3.1 ghz running 2k, XP or Vista.  The obsolete operating systems were efficient and didn't use wastefull programming systems to do simple processes.

    Wednesday, November 12, 2008 5:54 PM
  • and what do u mean by that
    Sunday, November 16, 2008 12:55 PM
  •  

    ImpatientInventor,

     

    Is SearchFilterHost.exe constantly using 30% of your CPU? That seems to be what you are saying but I need to get more precise details of what is happening on you system. If so, that's not a normal situation and is, of course, not the expected behavior of the indexer. The most common reason we have seen for constant high CPU in SearchFilterHost.exe is a problematic beta version of the Adobe DNG codec, so it is worth checking if you have this installed.

     

    You mention "I am sure the corporate shared drives aren't properly administered". Can you explain which locations you have indexed and which parts of your system are on networked drives? Is your Outlook mail in a PST or OST on a network share? Are your My Documents on a network share?

     

    Dave Wood

    Wednesday, November 19, 2008 1:31 AM
  • I just found this thread because I was having a problem with explorer freezing up. Noticed searchfilterhost was using 40-50%.  Will need to review threads to see if there is a soln, but you seemed like you are still struggling to understand the problem. I have Vista Home Premium on a Dell XPS 420.  Was simply trying to rename folders in Adobe Bridge when problem started.  Went to My Computer to find folder and rename, same problem of freezing occured.

     

    Thursday, November 27, 2008 7:43 PM
  • At this moment, searchfilter host is using 50% of my CPU, nothing is open except for IE7.  I've disabled xml search but no change.  If you tell me how to dump info to you, I'd be happy to. Using Vista Home Premium.

     

    Thursday, November 27, 2008 7:51 PM
  • Yes, I can confirm this. I have a Core 2 Duo 2.1 Ghz. When I change the task just to use one core, the core is at 100%.

    And, even when the priority of SearchFilterHost.exe is 'low', the use of CPU don't decrease if I start another heavy process.

    I hope Microsoft can fix this very soon!! I want to use the index!
    Tuesday, December 9, 2008 7:38 PM
  • Hello,

    I just ran Microsoft Update on a older single core machine running XP SP3, 2.4Ghz CPU, 1.5G memory.

    I elected to install Windows Desktop Search 4.x. Not very bright am I?

    I had the same problem others are having, 100% on the same .exe.

    I tried the various suggestions here with no luck.

    I then went to the control panel and unchecked ALL file types except *.txt. Now I can search .txt files and the CPU use is back to normal.

    Being able to search .txt files - now that's what I call progress.

    I am going to leave the machine alone for awhile and see if it continues to function. Then I may start adding back other file types.

    I would not be surprised if MS missed this because everyone there has quad core machines and the UI stays responsive.

    Good luck and Merry Xmas!
    Saturday, December 20, 2008 6:49 AM
  • I have the same issue. Can you tell me where the settings are to disable? Thanks.
    Monday, January 12, 2009 8:03 PM
  • Greetings, all.  I, too, ended up here after a quick Google search on the CPU hog.  I've been wrestling with this tool on one level or another for about eight months (since my arrival here).  Here are a few things I have figured out thus far:

    • The indexing service seems to have significant performance problems when installed on machines where existing users have large volumes of data, especially large PST files.  Indexing would run, but it would never finish.  Finally, after instructing the user to leave his PC running overnight for three consecutive nights, indexing finished and has only been a periodic problem on his machine. When allowing the service to install on a clean PC (e.g., new deployment, rebuilt PC), I've seen no problems.
    • For users with large PST files that are the default mail delivery location, the combination of the large size and the frequent changes seems to make the indexing service very busy.
    • Currently, it is causing problems on machines with Autodesk's AutoCAD LT 2008 installed (total CPU used by at least one of the indexing programs elevates to over 35% and stays there).
    • Making  changes to the list of file types selected for indexing seems to cause the service to want to re-index.  That can take a while.

    Honestly, I'd like to know what benefit these services are supposed to bring to the enterprise.  From my limited experience with them (only 8 months of problems here--I have almost 16 years of IT experience, but have not dealt with desktop support issues in the past five to six years at my former employer), they seem bring far more frustration to the user and they eat up far too many hours of my support time to be worth a supposedly speedier search experience.  In fact, for some searches on my machine, I've found that the general Windows Search Assistant has often been able to deliver a list of relevant files faster than the Windows indexing service.

    We run a variety of Dell machines with Windows XP Professional.  We have both x64 and x86 clients.  Most of our users are email packrats (PST file sizes in the 600 Mb to 1 Gb range are not uncommon), and a large number of our users run AutoCAD LT 2008/2009 and/or SolidWorks 2008.  Most machines have a minimum of 1 Gb RAM, and some are configured up to 4 Gb.  My user who has problems with the indexing service hogging the CPU this morning is on an x86 install of Windows XP Professional SP2 with 2 Gb RAM.  I'm going to check to see if he is running the most recent version.  The real rub on his machine is that nothing changed since Friday, yet it was running fine on Friday and is the king of hogs today.  The inconsistancy of these problems make them extremely frustrating to the users (since someone with a like configuration may not be having any problems at all).

    Monday, January 19, 2009 4:54 PM
  • Dave Wood,  I just started running into this problem.  Searchfilterhost.exe is using 90-100% CPU.  I had to reformat my hard drive (due to other problems with my USB ports which turned out to be a simple solution of remove and reinstall battery to reset bios). Anyway, after reformatting and reinstalling XP with service pack 3, windows search 4, office 07 pro and importing all my old personal files back into outlook, I started having this problem which has persisted for about a week. Have you found any resolution to this as I allready have windows search #4.
    Could it be one of my pst files that is causing it to use 100% cpu and should I merely export my old pst files for storage and delete them?
    How will removing windows search 4 effect my search capabilities?
    Monday, February 2, 2009 9:11 PM
  • I disable the "start MS Search at Startup" and that reduces the load. Once in a while I let it index again. The reality is that "low priority" or not it eats 100% of CPU arbitrarily when least expected. So it is better off. I haven't messed with the processes, though, just the "startup" option.
    Tuesday, February 3, 2009 5:32 PM
  • Vista Home Premium 32 bit
    Intel Core Duo E6550 2.33 GHZ
    6GB RAM 

    I have read about half of these posts and I have the same problem.
    This is a serious problem if this thread has been alive for just over TWO YEARS and there appears to be no real solution.

    Over the weekend, I was building a slide-show on Lightroom 2.3 and using music from iTunes(the latest version 8.02.20). I kept getting glitches in the music. I fired up the Resource Monitor and was topping out at 100% CPU occasionally.

    Now, with all programs off and nothing (except whatever runs at startup and Resource Monitor). 50% of my CPU is used up by SearchFilterHost.exe and an average 23% used by WmiPrvSe.exe (pulsing between 5 and 40%).

    I have recently added a few thousand Adobe .dng files. Since I started using Lightroom in December '08.
    I have also downloaded the Adobe codec that allows Windows Explorer to read the .dng files.
    I have let the computer run (just in case it is actually indexing and not stuck in some sort of loop) for 4 days now with no relief.
    Then I restarted without relief.

    What should I do?




    Friday, March 6, 2009 3:54 PM
  •  There are issues with at least some versions of the Adobe DNG codec that cause SearchFilterHost.exe to use excessive CPU. Please try uninstalling the codec and see if that fixes things.

    Thanks,
    Dave Wood
    Monday, March 9, 2009 5:24 PM
  • So far I have turned off indexing with complete success. Now not higher than about 30% total CPU Usage
    The problem still existed though I deselected .dng as a file type under the indexing options, advance tab.
    I will give it a go without the .dng codec turning on indexing and see what happens.
    Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:16 PM
  • I have this same problem.  I also have seen a nearly identical discussion over vsmon.exe (part of ZoneAlarm).  I think the problem is two fold:  First, the search indexer is not the only thing that scans files on Windows startup, so do antivirus and antispywear.  Also, I have noticed the "auto-update" of several apps (e.g. firewalls) also compeeting for resources at start-up.  Using the Windows Task Manager, I am able to see that it is not just the CPU that is pegged but also the disks are thrashing.  Lots of I/O reads, lots of page faults, lots of swapping in and out of virtual memory.  Second, there is no way to require one to finish before another starts.

    I find that if I snooze the indexing and pause ZA from scanning, my machine quickly recovers.  Then I can manually start/restart only one at a time and have much less of a problem.  What is needed as a feature is more control over process priorities (something more than "normal", "below normal", and "low") and a way to chain these to run in sequence at start-up, rather than letting them run in parallel.  Both the search indexer and my other scanning process(es) are good at pausing when there is user activity, but they are painfully unaware of the other services that are thrashing the disk and overwhelming the CPU.

    - Craig
    Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:00 PM
  •  Can you tell me where you can disable "start MS Search at Startup".  Is this only on Vista.  We are on XP SP3.  I can't find anywhere that can disable the indexing from starting immediatly on logging in.    I have no problem with it indexing when I am away from my computer, but it is ridiculous to have it start indexing immediately when you login.

    Monday, March 23, 2009 10:21 PM
  • I'm running XP sp3 on a P4 3GHz machine with 1GB RAM.  I got "infected" with the exact same problem when I recently installed the new/updated Windows Live programs, including Windows Search 4 and Live Mail.  Live Mail seems to be fairly resource inefficient, but my huge mail archive from 8 email accounts seemed to drive Windows Search crazy.  I do not have iTunes, so I didn't bother turning off the .xml indexing.  Task Manager quickly identified the culprits, well documented above.  I proceeded to turn off Windows Search.  I haven't looked back ("We don't need no stinkin' Windows Search!).

    Windows Search conveniently got added to the "Start > All Programs > Startup" folder.  Just pull the "Windows Search" shortcut out of there and the problem is solved.  (I actually moved it to a "Startbak" folder if for some reason I need to slow my machine down in the future ;-)  You should not need to go to msconfig to resolve this problem, but look there if for some reason Windows Search is not in your "Startup" folder.

    I had a similar problem with the Corel Media Indexer and stopped using it as well.  When the indexers waste more time than they save, they've lost their usefulness.  Contrary to MS intentions, the Windows Search indexer does not cut-out with keyboard activity.  This problem has been documented for over two years.  Maybe allowing users to schedule indexing for off hours would be a better default approach.  And they wonder why Vista hasn't been more popular.  Windows Live may suffer next.
    Wednesday, April 29, 2009 4:25 PM
  • I have found a workaround for all those with Vista/Windows 7 and have the issue with searchfilterhost.exe consuming 100% of a CPU:

    You can OF COURSE diable windows search service entirely, and some people have had success removing XML from the indexable file extensions. However none of that worked for me. I even set EVERY extension to "properties only" instead of contents and properties. I rarely need anything but the file name for xls and doc and the tags on the mp3s...

    If all of that fails try the following: remove ALL folders and options from the searchable index list including outlook/outlook express. Slowly - while watching the indexer control panel #'s and your taskmgr for a steady spike in searchfilterhost process, add in folders one by one (in chunks of folders like "my pictures" "my music" etc) until they complete indexing. In my case, something in My Videos was the culprit. Searchfilterhost was choking on some badly formed file, or perhaps it was trying to call a 3rd party codec that stumped it - whatever. I'm going to turn off indexing of AVI's completely to hopefully prevent this from occuring til they fix it.

    Problem was this: I moved to 7 on my laptop a few months ago. Since then I've had this feeling that its just running hotter and that the fan was always running. I just figured I was overdue for blowing the dust outta the fan. I didn't (duh!) really dig into it until now and noticed that process churning away. For months now I believe.

    My fan is back to mostly off, and my laptop rarely heats up again. Maybe I'll get some battery life again!

    Jesus MS - change the logic of your indexer to abort indexing a file FAR sooner if it gets bogged down. This is obviously a problem that many people are having on Vista and 7. I know in THEORY that the search processes run at low priority, but when this issue occurs, thats NOT the case! When searchfilterhost stumbles, it chokes a whole CPU! This is now heavily referenced, at least anecdotally, around the web.

    • Proposed as answer by chopsxxx Sunday, May 3, 2009 6:07 PM
    Sunday, May 3, 2009 6:05 PM
  • It's not just iTunes, I do alot of Java development, with various xml development, especailly when running builds or deployments locally to a Java EE container.  The files aren't really changing that much, but the time stamps are pretty constantly updated.  Disabling xml parsing has helpped a great deal and made the system much more responsive (in the realm of explorer, and file operations).  Windows Server 2k3 Windows Search 4.0
    Saturday, May 9, 2009 1:25 AM
  • I have found a workaround for all those with Vista/Windows 7 and have the issue with searchfilterhost.exe consuming 100% of a CPU:

    You can OF COURSE diable windows search service entirely, and some people have had success removing XML from the indexable file extensions. However none of that worked for me. I even set EVERY extension to "properties only" instead of contents and properties. I rarely need anything but the file name for xls and doc and the tags on the mp3s...

    If all of that fails try the following: remove ALL folders and options from the searchable index list including outlook/outlook express. Slowly - while watching the indexer control panel #'s and your taskmgr for a steady spike in searchfilterhost process, add in folders one by one (in chunks of folders like "my pictures" "my music" etc) until they complete indexing. In my case, something in My Videos was the culprit. Searchfilterhost was choking on some badly formed file, or perhaps it was trying to call a 3rd party codec that stumped it - whatever. I'm going to turn off indexing of AVI's completely to hopefully prevent this from occuring til they fix it.

    Problem was this: I moved to 7 on my laptop a few months ago. Since then I've had this feeling that its just running hotter and that the fan was always running. I just figured I was overdue for blowing the dust outta the fan. I didn't (duh!) really dig into it until now and noticed that process churning away. For months now I believe.

    My fan is back to mostly off, and my laptop rarely heats up again. Maybe I'll get some battery life again!

    Jesus MS - change the logic of your indexer to abort indexing a file FAR sooner if it gets bogged down. This is obviously a problem that many people are having on Vista and 7. I know in THEORY that the search processes run at low priority, but when this issue occurs, thats NOT the case! When searchfilterhost stumbles, it chokes a whole CPU! This is now heavily referenced, at least anecdotally, around the web.


    I have a Dell XPS M1330. It came with Vista Business. I used to get a fairly honest 4 hrs battery life when using MS office applications. I had this laptop for more than 1.5 years and little trouble (apart from many issues with vista which got better with each update). I needed to upgrade to Vista Ultimate to meet intra company system compatibility. After upgrading to the Ultimate version I noticed slower responses and sometimes blue screen crashes. The machine was a lot warmer than I was used to. Battery life was down to no more than 2.5 hrs. About a fortnight after Vista Ultimate installation a hardware fault developed. I learned through much pain and web searching about the NVIDIA graphic processor nightmare. Dell replaced my motherboard on  their voluntary extended warranty. After the repair I started to monitor the NVIDIA chip temperature with the NVIDIA software tool. The idling temperature was around 69 degrees C, with low intensity graphic use it rose quickly to 80 degrees C.
    I have recently installed the Windows 7 R/C. I found it much smoother running than Vista Ultimate but battery life was 2.5 hrs and the machine was quite warm. The aluminium keyboard palm rest panels were uncomfortably warm fifteen minutes after turning on the computer.
    Digging in I found that SearchFilterHost.exe ate 50% processor at idle and would interrupt only for very brief moments. After turning off the windows search feature the processor idles now around 1-2% and the machine is significantly cooler. Right now it sits on 60 degrees C. The keyboard palm rest is pleasantly luke warm after more than one hour operating time and remains there. Battery life is again at 4 hrs.
    The processor and the NVIDIA graphic chip is thermally connected to the same heat pipe. I wonder now if that has contributed to the failure of the NVIDIA hardware fault. The whole issue has taken (and still takes) very significant mental capacity and time. Not to mention lost productivity.
    Monday, May 18, 2009 5:06 AM

  • Hey MagWiz, kuddo's to you, I 2 am having same darn issue of 100% CPU under 7 only though but dualing Vista and 7, pissing me off, 7 suppose to be better, WTF MS, let me turn indexing on myself if I want it geez!

    Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:06 AM
  • Dave,

    In my office we've many users developing on Visual Studio TS and SQL 2005/2008, and the search filter host process has been bringing our systems to a standstill on a regular basis. We don't have any Adobe DNG codecs installed that I know of (certainly I don't on my machine). I tried disabling indexing of the xml file type, but that had no effect - since VS/SQL, and Office 2007 add about a bajillion xml-like file types to the system I don't think it's practical to disable indexing of all of them (and kind of defeats the purpose of indexing). The only solution we've found is disabling the search service itself, but then we lose the ability to search in Outlook. Do you have any recommendations for a workaround? As we're rolling out Office 2007 we're noticing the problem more and more.
    Tuesday, May 26, 2009 7:10 PM
  • Thanks Dave.  This is ultimately what I had to do by going into Services and stopping the "Windows Search" service because even after I removed .xml from the search index constraint it still was eating 50% of my CPU on my Intel Centrino Core 2 Duo 2.00 Ghz (Santa Rosa chipset).  Once I disabled the Windows Search, it went back down to less than 10% CPU.  I think because I NEVER delete an email and archive my emails to the "archive.pst" file, Windows Search was taking forever to index that file.  Just a guess though.  Would have to remove that 'archive.pst' and re-enable WS to see if it eventually normalizes OR ... remove Outlook from the indexable options.

    But thanks for the suggestions.  I don't suppose there is any way to minimize the intensity of the search indexing while the computer is in use is there?  I had that option enabled and it still didn't do anything.



    Nelson P.

    PS.  Tried MagWiz's suggestions and that failed miserably.  The only good indexing is no indexing.  No matter how much I reduce it or EVEN IF I PAUSE it, it still eats up CPU like crazy.  Just have to turn the thing off until they find a fix for it.
    Thursday, May 28, 2009 12:52 AM
  • Cannot Upgrade from Windows Vista to Windows 7, Internet Explorer Freezing
    Monday, June 1, 2009 6:35 AM
  •  Cannot Upgrade from Windows Vista to Windows 7, Internet Explorer Freezing
    Monday, June 1, 2009 6:36 AM
  • Here's an update: I've started moving through our enterprise and have been uninstalling Windows Search components--all of them.  On new PCs, I'm getting rid of it before it hits the floor.  The machines without it installed are now causing me no trouble, but am still having problems with some of the machines where it is still installed (and where the user does not want to give it up).  Pretty soon, I will press to have it removed as a matter of policy.  It is a problem, and the fact that this same behavior has been a problem for over two years tells me that Microsoft really doesn't care about fixing it.  I, for one, am done with it. 
    Tuesday, June 2, 2009 8:19 PM
  • Here's another way to look at it:

    The Core Duo T7600 in my machine uses an extra 15 watts when it's performing the apparently not very useful Windows Search... That's around 30kWh annually, so that's set me back around 20kg in CO2 this year!

    My advice, find Windows Search in the Services applet of Control Panel, then set it to Manual startup. How often do you use 'instant search' anyway?

    Or if you're still keen to have file names and modified dates etc. indexed, then as mentioned before, open up the Indexing Options applet of Control Panel, find the File Types tab in the Advanced section, then manually set all of the indexed file types to Properties Only - see if that helps.
    Monday, June 29, 2009 9:06 AM
  • Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. I only use Instant Search in Outlook, otherwise Search Companion is just fine for me. So, I removed all the locations that Windows Search was indexing, except Outlook. The resources taken are significantly less, especially when I'm creating/editing documents.
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 2:42 AM
  • DaveWood_MS had number of interesting suggestions that helped me solve the issue for my computer.
    The issue with high cpu utilization started when I upgraded to Windows 7 Ultimate RC 7100. One of the CPUs was almost 100% busy, but that was not slowing down my computer. The only reason why I even pursued fixing this issue, CPU utilization was draining my battery too fast. The other one, hands down, Windows 7 rocks, I did not want it blemished.

    So what did I try? I tried chkdsk /r, sfc /scannow.  None of them reported any issues. To get more color of what was taking place during indexing, I went the old fashined debugging approach, line by line. I installed ProcessExplorer and ProcessMonitor, Microsoft's SysInternal debugging tools. In addition, I launched Indexing window from control panel, that will show me count of files that have been processed so far. Inside Process Explorer, I set the filter to look for processes that begin with search and when path begins with c:\.  Once having all three applications ready, I set in the Indexing window to rebuild index.

    At first CPU was fine 10-20% busy, but then around 4000+ files, CPU utilization spiked to 100% on one of the CPUs. I went to ProcessExplorer and watched the file it was having issues with. It turned out to be  C:\Program Files\Common Files\Sonic Shared \SonicMC01\sonicamrd.ax. It created some kind of infinite loop, it would work on that file for good 5-10 minutes, and then it would switch to few other files inside C:\windows directory, and then come back to sonicamrd.ax file etc.
    Someone suggested to uninstall Sonic Shared AMR. I could not find which application installed it. I renamed the folder, and killed the searchfilterhost.exe process that was utilizing the CPU. The cpu went to 10-20% range, and 10k files later, indexing completed.

    In conclusion:
    1. It seems that the indexer high CPU utilization is unique from computer to computer, so the above approach of debugging seems one way around it. It does take time to download, install, and set up tools, but I think it's worth it long term.
    2. A mystery. Why is Indexing querying Program Files or Windows folders at all? I specifically checked Indexer to ensure it was only indexing user directories.

    • Proposed as answer by ed24 Friday, August 21, 2009 10:28 AM
    Friday, August 21, 2009 10:28 AM

  • I think the file you mention is part of a codec from Sonic Solutions / Roxio.

    What is happening is that this codec must be the registered codec for some kinds of media files on your system. Windows Search is indexing those media files which are in your user directory, and then invoking the registered codec in order to obtain the metadata from the media file. Some kind of problem is happening causing the codec to use 100% CPU. That's why you are seeing the file operations on the Program Files location - this is search loading the codec, it's not the actual file being indexed.

    I'm not aware of any problematic interactions between the Sonic AMR decoder and Windows Search but I will pass this onto the appropriate folks to look into.

    Dave Wood
    Friday, August 21, 2009 4:53 PM
  • XP SP2  Widows Search 4.0
    I found cisv.exe was using >80% of the CPU.  I found disabling it using Control Alt Delete solved the problem.  As a result of this forum I have now removed Widows Search 4.0 and CPU usage is <5-10%.
    Mike
    Friday, August 21, 2009 8:02 PM
  • Note that cisvc.exe isn'tpart of Windows Search 4, it's part of the built-in Indexing Service that comes with XP which can be enabled through the Search Companion. You wouldn't normally want to have Windows Search running and the Indexing Service at the same time.

    Dave Wood
    Monday, August 24, 2009 6:21 PM
  • I just thought, I would give a contribution to this discussion. Using Process Monitor which can be downloaded for free and following the guide from http://blogs.msdn.com/opal/archive/2008/07/14/troubleshooting-windows-search-cpu-consuming-problem.aspx, I discovered that whenever Windows Search tried  to index some specific Mathematica-notebooks, it went into an infinite loop making my CPU-utilization go towards 50%. Stopping the Search-service from the "services" menu in Windows 7, I was capable of opening the notebook that was the problem, and I was met by a warning telling me, that they were created using a prior version of mathematica (I am currently using version 7). After scanning the notebook for compability issues and saving it, having performed the suggested changes, the indexer (having started automatically in the mean time) now only used a few percent of the CPU power. I had to continue this procedure for a few more notebooks that all contained compatibility issues with my current version of Mathematica, but eventually the status of the indexer was changed to "Indexing complete"!!
    So, my best advice to people having this kind of problem is to figure out which files are causing the problems on their specific setup by using the guide that I linked to. Good luck! 
    Monday, September 14, 2009 11:26 AM
  •    You know Dave, I just read that ENTIRE thread as I was going thru my processes and trying to figure out exactly why it was that these things that I told to shut off were constantly turning back on. As I read your first few responses I thought, "Well gee. *insert dumb hick voice here* Here's a great guy trying to help some people out that are having problems. Isn't that nice of him." But as I continued to read and watch the dates go on, not just months but years flew by. And still no fix. And then you had the hick accent "Dave." You just kept saying those same things about updates and "ummm it really shouldn't,"  and "oh guys send me a dump file." And it kinda made me start to really look at who you might be Dave. I might be just a dumb hick but I'll tell you what I can recognize. A scam.
        It is AWFUL funny that between all those people you guys got down there at Microsoft you can't train this one little program to not try to call mommy 30 times a day. Any of you got any prior experience with computers? At all? I don't have much but I will tell you what. Pay me the money you get Dave, give me a 9/16" wrench, a pair of pliers and some duck tape and in the time it has taken for this thread to get to this point guess what I absolutely uncatagorically swear to you that I will do. I will figure out EXACTLY how to keep these people who spent their hard earned money on machines from people who gave you lots of that money from being spied on. I will give them what they have asked you for repeatedly now, only to get from someone else. And then I will take a world cruise with a week in each city that starts with the letters A-M. Twice. 
       So now that we've cleared up that you don't have to lie to me I just have to ask. What is your "job" at Microsoft there Dave? I am not asking you really. Because I am about to tell you. You are a PR guy who's job is to defend a Microsoft sponsored spyware program that will call you guys up and let you know any type of info you want to know. If in truth you are a developer of this insidious program then I salute you. For you are truly not only a good hacker but a genuine con artist as well to be able to fend so many people off who obviously know a little bit about computers for so long. I will tell you what tho. If Microsoft thinks that it is unstoppable then they should absolutely continue to epitomize the equivalent of the hollywood evil corporation that has gained too much power and run amuck. 
       Don't answer this post. I really don't care what you have to say to any of this as I could pretty much predict it without even using my Microsoft search which seems to somehow never be able to find any of the programs I ask it to find. Lol, ya know what? It alllllmost seems like that thing might just be a totally fake program altogether. Ofc what do I know? I'm just a dumb hick.
    Tuesday, December 1, 2009 5:36 AM
  • I'm having this problem too (Just upgraded my Search). It seems that one of the Search tasks is running at NORMAL priority, but they have it protected so I cannot even change the priority from the Administrator - GRRR.

    It occurs to me that the old axiom is true: "What speed Intel gives us, Bill gates takes away".

    The IE8 user interface has a freeze problem too - Sucks compared to IE6 & 7. Will not respond while it takes 100% CPU for a while after hitting certain web sites, even if I try to switch to annother tab - GRRR. The whole dang window freezes solid until that first web site loads. 

    This is suspiciously similar to the way Windows Explorer freezes if you type in the wrong network name, or a slow node - Not even the "X" button works to close the window. 

    Microsoft still has not figured how to multi-task properly, even when it comes to checking the "Cancel" button occasionally. None of what I mentioned should affect the User Interface - Search, IE8, and Windows Explorer should all load in the background while allowing near-full UI functionality (all events that do not need to logically wait for the load to complete should run in their own process).

    One of these days, maybe Microsoft will figure out how to multitask pre-emptively.
    Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:50 AM
  • I'm having this problem too (Just upgraded my Search). It seems that one of the Search tasks is running at NORMAL priority, but they have it protected so I cannot even change the priority from the Administrator - GRRR.

    It occurs to me that the old axiom is true: "What speed Intel gives us, Bill gates takes away".

    The IE8 user interface has a freeze problem too - Sucks compared to IE6 & 7. Will not respond while it takes 100% CPU for a while after hitting certain web sites, even if I try to switch to annother tab - GRRR. The whole dang window freezes solid until that first web site loads. 

    This is suspiciously similar to the way Windows Explorer freezes if you type in the wrong network name, or a slow node - Not even the "X" button works to close the window. 

    Microsoft still has not figured how to multi-task properly, even when it comes to checking the "Cancel" button occasionally. None of what I mentioned should affect the User Interface - Search, IE8, and Windows Explorer should all load in the background while allowing near-full UI functionality (all events that do not need to logically wait for the load to complete should run in their own process).

    One of these days, maybe Microsoft will figure out how to multitask pre-emptively.

    are you updated ? cause it works fine , ... for millions of others, ...

    when you post include the details of your comp and software , ...

    Microsoft has always been able to multitask , and will continue to do so , dont blame them if its your fault , ... (!)


    Scan with OneCare + 50 Windows 7even Tips + Plagued by the Privacy Center? REMOVE IT + Threat Research & Response Blog + Sysinternals Live tools + TRANSLATOR+ Photosynth + Microsoft Security + Microsoft SUPPORT + PIVOT from Live Labs + Microsoft Live Labs + Office 2010 beta + Get Windows LIVE!
    Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:54 AM
  • I'm updated - It's Windows XP Pro running on a Dell D600, but I had the same problems with all sorts of Microsoft apps on my high-end desktop at work, also running Windows XP, also updated.

    Sure Microsoft multi-tasks when apps act normally, your network doesn't pause, a web site you hit has no poorly-written JavaScript loops, the web site responds properly, and you have no mis-behaving hardware drivers - but they often don't multi-task at all when any one of those things happen, especially network drivers hanging things up.

    Often, it seems to also be that their apps' UI waits on hardware drivers when it doesn't even need too.

    And why does EVERY app virtually STOP when the disk drive is in heavy I/O (from database reorgs, file copies, disk defraggers, etc), even if you have almost no CPU usage and enough memory reserve that nothing needs to hit the pagefile - But it must need to hit the disk anyway, and the memory cache doesn't seem to give priority to the app you're using.

    This has always been the case, even with Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP. Maybe they fixed it in Windows Vista or W7, if so that would be my only reason for upgrading.
    Sunday, January 31, 2010 6:27 AM
  • I'm updated - It's Windows XP Pro running on a Dell D600, but I had the same problems with all sorts of Microsoft apps on my high-end desktop at work, also running Windows XP, also updated.

    Sure Microsoft multi-tasks when apps act normally, your network doesn't pause, a web site you hit has no poorly-written JavaScript loops, the web site responds properly, and you have no mis-behaving hardware drivers - but they often don't multi-task at all when any one of those things happen, especially network drivers hanging things up.

    Often, it seems to also be that their apps' UI waits on hardware drivers when it doesn't even need too.

    And why does EVERY app virtually STOP when the disk drive is in heavy I/O (from database reorgs, file copies, disk defraggers, etc), even if you have almost no CPU usage and enough memory reserve that nothing needs to hit the pagefile - But it must need to hit the disk anyway, and the memory cache doesn't seem to give priority to the app you're using.

    This has always been the case, even with Windows NT, Windows 2000, and Windows XP. Maybe they fixed it in Windows Vista or W7, if so that would be my only reason for upgrading.

    hi ,


    one its a dell , to much modifications on the software (!!)

    maybe you dont have enough memeory or pagefile ??

    updated ?

    have a nice sunday
    Scan with OneCare + 50 Windows 7even Tips + Plagued by the Privacy Center? REMOVE IT + Threat Research & Response Blog + Sysinternals Live tools + TRANSLATOR+ Photosynth + Microsoft Security + Microsoft SUPPORT + PIVOT from Live Labs + Microsoft Live Labs + Office 2010 beta + Get Windows LIVE!
    Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:14 PM
  • I, too, am on a Dell and have had problems for months.  I spent 8 count 'em 8 hours on the phone with Dell in Viet Name tryint to find out what was wrong with my computer.  Now I know it's because I have an enormous PST file and am betting that is the problem.  But what the ____ am I doing with this problem in 2010 if this was a known issue in 2007? 

    Great way to spend a snowy week.  But at least I no longer have a brick for a computer, as others have said. 
    Friday, February 12, 2010 4:13 AM
  • I, too, am on a Dell and have had problems for months.  I spent 8 count 'em 8 hours on the phone with Dell in Viet Name tryint to find out what was wrong with my computer.  Now I know it's because I have an enormous PST file and am betting that is the problem.  But what the ____ am I doing with this problem in 2010 if this was a known issue in 2007? 

    Great way to spend a snowy week.  But at least I no longer have a brick for a computer, as others have said. 

    hi ,

    yeah snow and more snow , its hurting my eyes in europe

    okay , next time check around before you buy , only 21 percent of dell buyers buy an other dell , ... the PST file should have nothing to do with it , do you have an external drive where you can save your info on ? try a full restore or get a windows disk and reinstall the os .

    in the mean time , click the link onecare scanner in my signature , unflag virus scan for a fast check , if you have the time include it , note that it can take a long time and you should not use the comp while scanning (!!) close all programs like mail and messenger that are not needed (!!)

    if you still have problems after that , click the link ' Microsoft support ' in my signature and follow the link , scroll down and get a chat with the support staff

    have a nice day
    Scan with OneCare + 50 Windows 7even Tips + Plagued by the Privacy Center? REMOVE IT + Threat Research & Response Blog + Sysinternals Live tools + TRANSLATOR+ Photosynth + Microsoft Security + Microsoft SUPPORT + PIVOT from Live Labs + Microsoft Live Labs + Office 2010 beta + Get Windows LIVE!
    Friday, February 12, 2010 5:10 AM
  • Windows 7 Professional Intel Q8200 Core2Quad

    Noticed today that my processor was running about 50% with GMail open in Firefox. Thought, this was odd behavior. Started digging into the perfmon, only to find our pal searchindexer.exe consistently hanging out with 25% of the processor followed closely by searchprotocolhost.exe at about 20%. Started my usual online search for what these services are, and happened upon this discussion, as well as a few other scattered threads on this issue.

    As an employee at another tech company that does work with support, I cannot help but ask why a Microsoft KnowledgeBase article has not been generated to address this issue? Granted in my case the 50% does not cause a significant system drain, until say I'm looking to do something important like coding in Visual Studio, or working in the Adobe Design Suite, or any other time I would want to take advantage of the performance I built into my system. Per your Engineer Dave's observation, this is a KNOWN issue, and ought be documented as such.

    For other users, my current solution has been disabling indexed search of XML, OST, and PST file types. My idle has since returned to 1-2%. Quite clearly, there is root cause to the index hanging on, what's that another Microsoft product in Outlook.

    PLEASE CREATE CUSTOMER FACING DOCUMENTATION OUTLINING THE ISSUES AS THEY HAVE BEEN CAPTURED HERE, AND PROVIDE A LIST OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS. I am sure your engineering group does not deal with this type of performance drain, and has long since been supplied with a work around. Please show respect to your user group, and release a path forward.

    Anyone at MS listening, I appreciate your time. We are just asking for you to take responsibility for the troubleshooting process.

    PCorcs
    Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:24 AM
  • Windows 7 Professional Intel Q8200 Core2Quad

    Noticed today that my processor was running about 50% with GMail open in Firefox. Thought, this was odd behavior. Started digging into the perfmon, only to find our pal searchindexer.exe consistently hanging out with 25% of the processor followed closely by searchprotocolhost.exe at about 20%. Started my usual online search for what these services are, and happened upon this discussion, as well as a few other scattered threads on this issue.

    As an employee at another tech company that does work with support, I cannot help but ask why a Microsoft KnowledgeBase article has not been generated to address this issue? Granted in my case the 50% does not cause a significant system drain, until say I'm looking to do something important like coding in Visual Studio, or working in the Adobe Design Suite, or any other time I would want to take advantage of the performance I built into my system. Per your Engineer Dave's observation, this is a KNOWN issue, and ought be documented as such.

    For other users, my current solution has been disabling indexed search of XML, OST, and PST file types. My idle has since returned to 1-2%. Quite clearly, there is root cause to the index hanging on, what's that another Microsoft product in Outlook.

    PLEASE CREATE CUSTOMER FACING DOCUMENTATION OUTLINING THE ISSUES AS THEY HAVE BEEN CAPTURED HERE, AND PROVIDE A LIST OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS. I am sure your engineering group does not deal with this type of performance drain, and has long since been supplied with a work around. Please show respect to your user group, and release a path forward.

    Anyone at MS listening, I appreciate your time. We are just asking for you to take responsibility for the troubleshooting process.

    PCorcs

    hi ,

    you have people who think that by indexing the whole drive search will be faster , ... they include like 25 back ups , etc , .... and it can cause some down perf , only flag personal folders , folders you use often or need .

    the prefetch function is like a learning library , it learns the more you use certain programs to expect them , load maybe key parts so when needed it will start faster , ont listen to people who claim it will increase perf , maybe by 0.005 (!!) its beter to type MSCONFIG and to see what runs at booth , it can increase perf in huge steps

    investing in a serious USB stick for some lets say 8 gb of readyboost and a good defrag will speed things up also , now if you really want a fast comp get a faster drive , from 10 000 rpm and up , this will cause the biggest leap in perf !

    as for MS , they take responsability , but when people do not contact support they cant help , .... (!!)

    have a nice day
    Scan with OneCare + 50 Windows 7even Tips + Plagued by the Privacy Center? REMOVE IT + Threat Research & Response Blog + Sysinternals Live tools + TRANSLATOR+ Photosynth + Microsoft Security + Microsoft SUPPORT + PIVOT from Live Labs + Microsoft Live Labs + Office 2010 beta + Get Windows LIVE!
    Wednesday, February 17, 2010 10:21 PM
  • Hi,

    My 0.02 cents is that I don't use any kind of indexing on my hard disk or email... a disk defrag makes sense - but I agree with Dabur972 that you should get the fastest hard disk & large cache you can find.

    I turn off every single program that is not absolutely necessary, pre-loading applications doesn't make sense to me because it just bloats your memory - when you get a new Dell there is like dozens of apps loading in the background at start-up.

    Everyone software company thinks that they should either preload the app, run a upgrade process, and so on... it's enough to make even the fastest system yield.

    Why would I slow down my system 98% of the time to save on the 2% that I need when I actually need indexing???

     

     

     

     

     

     


     

    Thursday, April 8, 2010 3:07 PM
  • Hi everybody,

    I having the same issues except when I go to disable .xml files from being indexed there is nothing showing in the file type.  Any ideas on what might be causing this?

     

    Monday, June 14, 2010 1:55 PM
  • Eric   Could you explain how you do this please?
    • <form style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-family: inherit; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;">
      Path: em
      </form>
      <button style="background-color: #eeeeee; margin: 0.25em; border: 1px solid #bbbbbb;">Submit</button><button style="background-color: #eeeeee; margin: 0.25em; border: 1px solid #bbbbbb;">Cancel</button> <input style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #000000; vertical-align: middle;" checked="checked" name="subscribe" type="checkbox" /><label style="font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-family: inherit; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;">Alert me when someone responds to this post.</label>
    • Sunday, March 25, 2007 2:34 PMehamm13Users MedalsUsers MedalsUsers MedalsUsers MedalsUsers Medals
       
      Vote As Helpful
      Thanks, Eric... That helped out a great deal..
    Wednesday, July 7, 2010 1:33 PM
  • Hey Dave Wood [MS],

    Is it ok to install Windows Search 4.0 on my index-service-running Windows Server 2008 (64-bit) box where I'm trying to get Outlook 2007 "Instant Search" to run?

    And will installing Windows Search 4.0 solve my problem of Outlook misinforming me that Window Search service is not installed?

    Thanks

     

    Sunday, September 19, 2010 7:32 PM
  • I've had this problem as well, and _solved it_, as is often the case, with a non-MS answer. Disable the MS search function entirely, then install the free, small, low-footprint Everything from voidtools.com. I have a huge number of files and clients constantly providing more. takes up less than 20M of RAM and can rarely find it above 1% processing. It only indexes filenames, so if you need content . . . Not only does it index faster, the results window is a far better tool.
    Tuesday, October 19, 2010 4:33 PM
  • Hello - I am a corporate user (still running Windows XP with Office 2007 Pro with Windows search installed...)

    Interesting to note that when the XML extention was deselected I was presented with the option to reindex... being a rabid OK 'button pusher' I realized that the message was really informing me it would reindex all my searchable items... DUH... CPU pegged at 90%+ becuase it's rebuilding an index of 100K+ items! LOL lesson learned. :-)

    Thursday, December 16, 2010 6:52 PM
  • This forum is for help in writing Windows-search aware software. I don't know much about Outlook, but you may want to try visit the outlook forums on answers.microsoft.com for help in Outlook's Windows Search filter.

    As for XML indexing, check which filter is responsible for indexing xml files, maybe you need to hire a programmer to write another one, or buy another software that can expose XML content for Windows Search.


    The following is signature, not part of post
    Please mark the post answered your question as the answer, and mark other helpful posts as helpful, so they will appear differently to other users who are visiting your thread for the same problem.
    Visual C++ MVP
    Tuesday, February 8, 2011 6:18 PM
  • "This forum is for help in writing Windows-search aware software"

    You haven't read this thread then. It's about clearing up the problem w/ this search software.

    Like previous responedent noted: Use "Search 'Everything' from voidtools.com"

    To disable the sux ms search, go to services, stop the service from the left pane, then right click on the service and fully disable it from the dialog box.

     

     

     

    Saturday, February 12, 2011 7:33 PM
  • Another mislead user. What make you think the forum is for improving the quality Microsoft's products? 

    This forum is on MSDN, where D here stands for developers. This forum is for help in improving the quality of our products, that is, products not from Microsoft. We software developers need to get help from Microsoft from time to time, you know, and MSDN is such a web site. 

    I post to this old thread because the thread , as you said, do not match the forum's description. Since too many users here are misled by posts like this to think this forum is the place to ask question about using Windows Search itself. I figured it is a good idea to point the correct forum to them. You know, the number for Windows users is more than Windows developers, and the Windows user forum has more traffic

    If you want to wait in a forum where this kind of question is ignored by frequent visitors, fine with me. but the correct forum is just a few keystroke away.



    The following is signature, not part of post
    Please mark the post answered your question as the answer, and mark other helpful posts as helpful, so they will appear differently to other users who are visiting your thread for the same problem.
    Visual C++ MVP
    Saturday, February 12, 2011 8:17 PM
  • I noticed the CPU usage up on my PC and upon viewing the processes in use found the serchfilterhost.exe to be rather high .. 35%. But I also noticed that I had an external drive pugged in (USB) that had not been previously indexed. I was also able to duplicate the same when I plugged in my simplesave HP backup. Once the indexing was complete - the process stopped and my PC returned to its usual idleing speed. Just wanted to make sure there was something attached to your system that was making the process behave as normal ... just a thought.

     

    Cheers!

    Monday, March 28, 2011 10:27 PM