"Reactor" <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Ken Willmott" <ken### [at] rogerscom> wrote:
> > When I removed the crackle function from my main project, all the problems
> > disappeared. Memory remained stable, slightly less than 2.0GB. It will be a
> > painful loss, since it made such beautiful rock surfaces. I guess I will end up
> > using something like bozo+wrinkles instead.
> >
> > It is my impression that virtual memory is useful mostly to make memory
> > management easier, rather than to increase the working memory capacity. It can't
> > work with 100% physical memory allocated because of excessive disk swapping. I
> > think this is a fundamental constraint that is common to all OS, whether it is
> > Windows or Linux or whatever.
>
>
> You mentioned having quite a bit of RAM.  Have you tried turning virtual memory
> off and using a RAM disk to see how it does?  RAM disks are not difficult to set
> up, and it may be worth the effort.
>
> -Reactor

I see very little disk activity during rendering, basically just the output file
being written to. I really don't think disk I/O is a significant bottleneck, but
it is interesting to consider how I might use it for other applications.

Post a reply to this message