SV: I'm sure this has been asked before...

Jerry
I think this is the same problem as the one I ran into when trying to render
some pretty large pic's.
MS can't handle more then 2 gigs of ram/application.....in reality somewhere
between 1,5 to 1,7 GB. I have 2Gig ram on both my machines and I hit the
roof at about 1,5-1,7 >Gig ...then Sw tells me it doesn't obtain enough
memory....and I almost taired my hair off before I understood what was
happening.... many thanks to Edward T Eaton who helped me off......but
that's the limit I believe
Krister L
Jerry Steiger skrev i
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
> I recently spoke to Greg Jankowski from SW and he stated installing a > second
> > hard drive dedicated to virtual memory was one of the greatest payoffs for
> > performance per cost that most users overlook.
>
>
> This makes absolutely no sense to me. If you are hitting swap space at all,
> no matter how fast your disk is, you are going to be slowing down a lot.
> Buying more RAM is the answer, not a small, fast hard disk.
>
> Having said that, I still run into problems even though I have 1.5GB of RAM.
> Sometimes (say when trying to do a STEP translation of a relatively large
> assembly), SW will tell me it can't get any memory, even though I am at less
> than 1.5GB and have an additional 1.5GB of swap space available. >
> Jerry Steiger
> Tripod Data Systems
>
>
Reply to
Krister L
Loading thread data ...
I've seen that same memory limit, 1.7mb, while trying to import very large IGS models (last occurence was with sw2001 or 2001+). A general Windows limit, I suppose. It doesn't seem that physical memory is relevant to the problem.
bill
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
bill allemann
It is a "per process" limitation of 2 GB. If you use Win XP, I believe that you can set a 3 GB switch to allow up to 3 GB of memory per process.
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
Ken
Yes, you can set the 3GB switch, and it really works if you have the physical RAM. I am not sure about the virtual memory, though - we will try to test that sometime this month, I think. Just remember - do not enable the switch without getting the patch first! XP, SP1 will not reboot at all if the /3GB modification has been made without also doing the patch. There was a thread on this back in October that gives explicit detail on exactly what to do.
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
Edward T Eaton
As I mentioned earlier, Greg Jankowski's article will be address performance issues in this months Cadalyst, including this 3 GB switch. On a side note, the next version of XP (Windows XP 64) will be able to access 16 GB of memory on board and 16 TB of virtual memory. I remember the days when 640 KB was huge and an extra 1 MB on an expansion card was high end, back then people would have ask what GB meant, not to mention TB!
Keith
off......but
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
Keith Streich
OK, I was mislead. He doesn't have an article in this month's (January 2004) Cadalyst and his online article in Cadalyst is about using toolbox on a network. I was hoping his performance list would be documented soon for all to review. I would list them myself in this newsgroup, but my notes were rather messy and specific for my needs.
Sorry for the misinformation, Keith Streich
message
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
Keith Streich
OK, I was mislead. He doesn't have an article in this month's (January 2004) Cadalyst and his online article in Cadalyst is about using toolbox on a network. I was hoping his performance list would be documented soon for all to review. I would list them myself in this newsgroup, but my notes were rather messy and specific for my needs.
Sorry for the misinformation, Keith Streich
message
diskussionsgruppsmeddelandet:brt8dj$77jub$ snipped-for-privacy@ID-200869.news.uni-berlin.de...
Reply to
Keith Streich
Keith,
Could you post a link to the Toolbox on the network article. I can't seem to find it.
Thanks,
Aaron
Keith Streich wrote:
Reply to
Aaron
I don't even see a link to his November or December article. The printed issue says it's there, when I find it, I post a link.
Keith
Reply to
Keith Streich
Here is the link for the Toolbox article:
formatting link
Aaron
Keith Streich wrote:
Reply to
Aaron
Thanks, you beat me to it! Now if we can get him to publish the performance list!
Keith
Reply to
Keith Streich

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.