I installed the hotfix this morning and.. for me, this is, overall BS!!
I've done about 10 test on single surface parts (5-25 megs in size) and
this file reduction hype is a big load of crap!!!
First, comparing SW2006sp5.1 (also slow!) against SW2007sp2.x (just
installed 2.1)is a major negative performance hit, period!
Rebuilding is about the same or slower, "the problem is"...
..after a rebuild, the interface is unavailable to the user until about
a 3X factor over the rebuild!?!?
There is sumthing majorly wrong with how SW releases the data back to
the interface after a rollback/roll forward or forced rebuild!?
So, back to the test,.. if you do a ctrl-q and save-as and open it back
up, rollback and roll to end and save,.. about 1/3 of the models I
tested are LARGER and 1/3 about the same and about 1/3 are smaller,
~20-40% (NOT 50% smaller!)
Now, with SW2007sp2.x being so freaking SLOW, file reduction and what it
does reduce, if any time saved in the process, is ridiculous!
This is a BIG marketing tail wag that went wrong!
So, who benifits from this,... most likely very large datasets and
that's SIMPLE prismatic data, (not top/down design (no broken links
allowed)) and working over a network?
Who is this geared towards,.. the mainstream prismatic users (read,
possible Ade$k Inventor users or others who maybe interested in
This is basic marketing 101 BS!!
Please, SW Corp, prove it!?
Prove the performance enhancements of SW2007 and this file reduction
based against previous versions/data?
Let's see,.. say, single complex surface parts, mid level surface/solid
asm's (using top/down) and large asm's with surfaces/solids (using
Prove it. Awh, you can't can you?
You see, SW Corp doesn't have to prove ANYTHING!
Because, that's what marketers do, they don't have to prove anything....
until they have too and that usually means, legally.
Otherwise, it's all about bending over and taking it or, getting on your
knees and being a shill?
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
The SolidWorks Knowledge Base article does say that it won't reduce file
sizes for all files and specifically mentions that it is most likely to
reduce file size on files with many configurations. They also don't make any
claims as to how big the file size reduction will be.
Given your results, I'm not about to rush to download the hot fix.
Has anyone else tried it and got results to share?
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"
I just rechecked that file size and it looks like it has ballooned back to
its original size. I had been working with it this afternoon, jumping around
the configs etc, but nothing to add file size. Back to 320 megs. Oh Well!
I don't know about the specific effects of the mentioned HOT Fix;
however, you may want to make note of the typical behavior of
For example, check the size of a file you have been working on and just
saved. Then save the file by writing it out of SolidWorks as a COPY.
Typically the copy will be smaller - sometimes much smaller, but the
trouble is the "compression" is only temporary. Open the copy and save
it (even without making any changes) and it will balloon to become
larger. As I understand it, the size difference comes from the
temporary stripping away of the OLE (object linking and embedding)
Per O. Hoel
Michael Eckstein wrote:
I read the Microsoft Knowledge Base article and don't see any reference to
reducing file sizes. It does say that "the storage object may be corrupted"
if the error occurs which, I assume, this hot fix is supposed to correct.
Does anyone know what is really going on here?
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"
Yes Jerry, I noticed that too, along with this troubling statement directly
from the MS bulletin...
"This problem only occurs on FAT file systems. For example, flash drives
frequently use the FAT file system. This problem does not occur on FAT32 or
NTFS file systems."
I really wonder if this is a smoke and mirror thing. Don't know what there
motives might be but I added the hotfix and then restored back because it
meant nothing for me either. If anything it added time to my rebuild and
save times with sp2.0/2.1.
If any certified MS MVP's frequent this group or anyone knows one that can
be asked it sure would be nice to hear from them on this...
It was a fairly complex surface model file. Half of the tree was
supressed, and the 900mbish was with shadow data. Either way, the
folder I had for that paticular project was 9gb. After the hotfix, I
ctrl-Q'd and saved a few of the largest files in that folder. It
brought the folder size down to under 6gb.
I added a few features onto the file that I had good results with, and
the file size is staying down so far.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.