Take the 2-minute tour ×
Server Fault is a question and answer site for professional system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I've been trying to reclaim some of the 45+GB of cached updates in W2K3. I've manually audited and declined hundreds of updates and packages, and everytime I run Server Cleanup Wizard it's deletes 14MB.

I have also tried WSUSutil but doesn't seem to do anything.

How do I free up more space?

share|improve this question
    
Which version of WSUS? –  Hyppy Mar 30 '11 at 15:05
    
3.2.7600.226 sorry –  Seth Mar 30 '11 at 15:13

2 Answers 2

up vote 0 down vote accepted

There are a few obvious and not-so-obvious causes of a large content folder, even after declining updates and running the Cleanup Wizard:

  • Downstream servers. If you have downstream servers, then you won't be able to get rid of the updates unless every single client on every single downstream server shows it as unneeded, regardless of approval status on the upstream server.
  • Express Installation Files. If you've enabled these (under Update Files and Languages), then your content folder will increase in size by a significant amount.
  • Other languages. If you have more than just English updates selected, then you'll see an increase in language-specific update files.
  • Forefront client updates - These are big. Really big.

How many updates do you have, by the way? For us, with about 1500 approved updates, the WsusContent folder is only about 16 GB. The SP and services folders are an additional 2.5 GB.

share|improve this answer
    
Well i wish I could tell you now, WSUS just hosed. Uninstalling and reinstalling now. This is a standalone WSUS. No downstream servers. –  Seth Mar 30 '11 at 16:15

Standard problem with WSUS Cleanup Wizard timing out without removing any unnecessary updates. SBS2K8. WSUS 3. 6000+ unnecessary updates awaiting approval. Huge database. Unresponsive SQL server. Lot of people have this problem.

Drives are regularly defragged in the background. Not gonna shut down the server and have down time just to fix this.

Tried the reindexing script from technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd939795(WS.10).aspx , (don't copy the command line, it has weird characters in it, just type it in manually.) and it completes but it didn't improve anything.

Found this: wsus.codeplex.com/releases/view/17612 and it also times out.

Found this comment:

For anyone who is getting Timeout Expired with obsolete updates. I have a solution! Use server name : " \.\pipe\MSSQL$MICROSOFT##SSEE\sql\query " to connect with SQL managment studio. Once connected manually run " exec spGetObsoleteUpdatesToCleanup ". This will return a list of obsolete ID's. For each one run " exec spDeleteUpdate @localUpdateID=000000 ", where 000000 is the ID. For myself I found the first ID in the list took a full 37 minutes to delete and then after that I could run the cleanup through the GUI as per usual.

by jjdacl on Apr 23 at 12:55 PM

Found that you actually need to do:

USE SUSDB
GO
exec spGetObsoleteUpdatesToCleanup

And to connect in the first place, I had to hit Options, and select named pipe from the middle pull down.

First delete took 6 minutes and memory has spiked up to almost 15GB in use out of 16GB physical. But the WSUS console (Update Services) still shows the same number of old updates. Failure? I don't think so: I'm running the cleanup wizard again and so far it isn't timing out... It has run over night, and has made some progress; the bar has moved perhaps 5%. So... My take is that the SQL server causes this problem when there is to much data, because the indexes are poorly designed (not because the indexes need to be re-indexed) causing the first query to time out, which causes the cleanup to fail. Once you get past that first deletion, and have everything loaded into memory, the cleanup tool can stay connected long enough to delete each unneeded update. Next step will be to find a command line method, such as: http://wsus.codeplex.com/releases/view/17612 and put it into the task scheduler like Microsoft should have done at the beginning to keep this from getting out of hand.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.