 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
While woorking on my latest Rusty animation, I've been noticing that the
peak memory usage figure seems to go up with each frame. For instance,
in one shot, the first frame uses 12 megs or so of RAM. The next frame
shows about 13.5 megs of RAM, and this peak figure continues to grow as
long as the sequence is rendering, even though the number of objects
remains the same. If I stop rendering, the amount goes back to 12 megs,
and the memory appears to get released. On one sequence the peak
memory figure was over 80 megs when the rendering was down. I am pretty
sure that only the original 12 megs is needed for the actual render, and
with a 96 meg machine I'm not experiencing a virtual memory thrash.
It seems to me that POV-Ray (I'm using the Win95 version) for some
reason doesn't release everything between frames, but does release
everything when all frames are done.
Can anyone else confirm this observation, and if so, has it caused any
genuine problems?
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
>
> While woorking on my latest Rusty animation, I've been noticing that the
> peak memory usage figure seems to go up with each frame. For instance,
> in one shot, the first frame uses 12 megs or so of RAM. The next frame
> shows about 13.5 megs of RAM, and this peak figure continues to grow as
> long as the sequence is rendering, even though the number of objects
> remains the same. If I stop rendering, the amount goes back to 12 megs,
> and the memory appears to get released. On one sequence the peak
> memory figure was over 80 megs when the rendering was down. I am pretty
> sure that only the original 12 megs is needed for the actual render, and
> with a 96 meg machine I'm not experiencing a virtual memory thrash.
>
> It seems to me that POV-Ray (I'm using the Win95 version) for some
> reason doesn't release everything between frames, but does release
> everything when all frames are done.
>
> Can anyone else confirm this observation, and if so, has it caused any
> genuine problems?
>
> Regards,
> John
I have noticed (and reported that behaviour) before (quite a long time ago).
I haven't had any real problems with it on my Win95 system, but with a Win98
system it often happened that after completing the render the system would
freeze. It's probably something with system resources and Win95's sloppiness
with this appears to be a slight advantage ;)
Regards,
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
My possible submission to this round of the IRTC has 208 walking blobmen
(not much else, so I'm almost embarassed to submit it). Anyway, around the
130th frame, it crashed for lack of memory. So I just started it right up
again at that frame and it was cool.
I have also frequently observed that the render time per frame always creeps
up during an animation.
John VanSickle wrote:
> While woorking on my latest Rusty animation, I've been noticing that the
> peak memory usage figure seems to go up with each frame. For instance,
> in one shot, the first frame uses 12 megs or so of RAM. The next frame
> shows about 13.5 megs of RAM, and this peak figure continues to grow as
> long as the sequence is rendering, even though the number of objects
> remains the same. If I stop rendering, the amount goes back to 12 megs,
> and the memory appears to get released. On one sequence the peak
> memory figure was over 80 megs when the rendering was down. I am pretty
> sure that only the original 12 megs is needed for the actual render, and
> with a 96 meg machine I'm not experiencing a virtual memory thrash.
>
> It seems to me that POV-Ray (I'm using the Win95 version) for some
> reason doesn't release everything between frames, but does release
> everything when all frames are done.
>
> Can anyone else confirm this observation, and if so, has it caused any
> genuine problems?
>
> Regards,
> John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson wrote:
>
> I have also frequently observed that the render time per frame always
> creeps up during an animation.
Actually, in the shot I was working on, the render time decreased, but
that was due to a gradual reduction of AA requirements.
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is a known problem with POV-Ray. I think most of the memory leaks have
been fixed in the latest version of MegaPOV, but I'm not sure of this.
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nope. My prob occurs in mega 0.5a., unless of course you mean 0.6
Mark Wagner wrote:
> been fixed in the latest version of MegaPOV, but I'm not sure of this.
>
> Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When I do alot of POV work, ie. never close POV and use it continuously for
a long period of time, my machine will die due to memory issues. I guess
they are associated with memory leaks in the POV engine. I'm not doing
animations, just rendering the same or different scenes over and over. This
is least noticible when doing small objects/renders versus very apparent
when doing something complex like my city renders where lots and lots of
objects are repeated via random placement loops.
Robert J Becraft
aka cas### [at] aol com
John VanSickle <van### [at] erolscom> wrote in message
news:39E71F31.34D2551F@erols.com...
> While woorking on my latest Rusty animation, I've been noticing that the
> peak memory usage figure seems to go up with each frame. For instance,
> in one shot, the first frame uses 12 megs or so of RAM. The next frame
> shows about 13.5 megs of RAM, and this peak figure continues to grow as
> long as the sequence is rendering, even though the number of objects
> remains the same. If I stop rendering, the amount goes back to 12 megs,
> and the memory appears to get released. On one sequence the peak
> memory figure was over 80 megs when the rendering was down. I am pretty
> sure that only the original 12 megs is needed for the actual render, and
> with a 96 meg machine I'm not experiencing a virtual memory thrash.
>
> It seems to me that POV-Ray (I'm using the Win95 version) for some
> reason doesn't release everything between frames, but does release
> everything when all frames are done.
>
> Can anyone else confirm this observation, and if so, has it caused any
> genuine problems?
>
> Regards,
> John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have to restart my machine after a series of test runs with lots of
objects. There is a noticable slowdown but as yet no crashes or out of
memory messages.
Mick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle <van### [at] erolscom> wrote in message
news:39E71F31.34D2551F@erols.com...
> It seems to me that POV-Ray (I'm using the Win95 version) for some
> reason doesn't release everything between frames, but does release
> everything when all frames are done.
>
> Can anyone else confirm this observation, and if so, has it caused any
> genuine problems?
John:
I had a play to try to re-create the problem you have experienced - I run
under Windows NT, which has a couple of performance monitoring tools which
lets you examine a programs memory usage somewhat more accurately that Win
9x, I hoped that I might be able to let you know if it was POV-Ray allocated
memory, or memory allocated by Windows on behalf of POV-Ray (i.e. file
buffers, etc) which was growing. Alas I was unable to re-create symptoms you
describe, trying all the scenes I currently have, for the first couple of
frames, POV-Ray does not seem to free up 100% of the memory it had, but by
frame 5, the memory usage is consistently dropping to the same base level
between frames.
As I am running the same code (I assume we are talking POV-Ray Version
3.1g.watcom.win32) this must mean that your 'memory leak' is occurring in
one of the DLL's, or in Windows itself - i.e. the bits that are different in
Win NT. The fact that the memory returns when POV-Ray stops would make me
think that it is Windows itself: Windows performs it's house-keeping and
memory management as a background task, as POV-Ray is CPU intensive, Windows
may be delaying it's garbage collection until it needs to.
A possible way of confirming this might be to watch your memory usage until
it appears that two or three meg has gone adrift, then rather than stopping
POV-Ray, pause it, and minimise it. Wait for the HDD activity to die down,
then bring it back up again. Unpause it and check your memory usage - if I
am correct, the memory will have come back.
If this is the case, then I have two suggestions:
1. Ignore it - if anything, this 'problem' is probably making your machine
run slightly faster than if Windows were to clean up as it goes. When you
run out of physical memory, or try to run another application, Windows will
housekeep existing unallocated memory before resorting to swap-file usage.
2. Run a post-frame command to execute a program which will pause for two or
three seconds before exiting and allowing POV-Ray to continue. N.B. This
pause must be an event triggered pause, not a loop (which would hang up the
CPU as much as POV-Ray does). Hopefully Windows will seize this opportunity
to perform it's garbage collection.
Hope this helps.
Duncan.
N.B. Despite being a programmer myself, I must admit this is largely guess
work.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote:
> This is a known problem with POV-Ray. I think most of the memory leaks have
> been fixed in the latest version of MegaPOV, but I'm not sure of this.
>
> Mark
There were many memory leaks fixed in MP 0.6 but some of those fixes
lead to new bugs.
In MegaPOV 0.6a more memory leaks have been fixed. The isosurface object
and pigment had lots and lots of memory leaks.
They should be fixed now in 0.6a and this time there are, hopefully :-),
no new bugs.
But I would not guarantee that *all* memory leaks are fixed.
Smellenbergh
--
e-mail:sme### [at] skynetbe
http://users.skynet.be/smellenbergh
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
