Problem with that is that if you run out of both, the program is forced
to crash.

What I did on NT is set up a good permanent swap space by setting the
min to about 200 on two drives.  It takes up space all the time, but I
find it good to gaurentee that it will always be there.  If you set it
too low, you could end up using up all the space on your hard drive
without thinking about it and leave nothing for programs to deal with
when RAM runs out.

Then I set a real big space for the max. Went around 400 on one drive
and 1 gig on another.  As long as I don't fill up either drive I've got
plenty of space to deal with.

My computer doesn't really use virtual memory anymore when using POV
since I upgraded to 256 megs of RAM. Some programs prefer to use disk
space to store things, like the temp directory, since if the program
crashes the file isn't destroyed, so it's good to have the swap space
for that.

Bob Hughes wrote:
> 
> Have you tried (risked, more like) a permanent swap file of a very
> minimum size by manually setting the Virtual Memory? Maybe something
> around that 20 Megabytes you mention that Windows is normally using, so
> that POV-Ray (or is it Windows) is forced into RAM only.
> Think I'll risk--- er, *try* that just to check for myself.
> 
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >   I have a couple of observations about memory managment on my system I would
> > like to get your opinions about.
> >
> >   I have a file I rendered just now that has 100k objects and according to
> > Pov's stats used a peak memory of 102 megs. I have 128 megs of ram installed
> > on my system using two 64 meg 72 pin EDO ram simms in the first bank only.
> > My system architecture is supposed to be able to access up to a maximum of
> > 128 megs so I have it max'd out.
> >
> >   I also have a windows 98 managed swap file specified in the control panel.
> > System resources are 97% free according to several memory reporting utilities.
> > That leaves over 120 megs of unused free ram memory.
> >
> >   After rendering the aforementioned scene I checked the size of my HD swap file
> > and it was nearly 135 megs in size. It's usual size under windows management is
> > 20 megs until a program writes to it.
> >
> >   What I don't understand is with 128 megs of ram memory on board why would my
> > swap file ever grow so large when the system memory is sufficient to cover the
> > use of the programs being run ? I know the speed increase of using ram memory
> > over swap file memory is significant and would prefer to run in that environment.
> >
> > Anybody ?
> >
> > --
> > Ken Tyler
> >
> > mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> 
> --
>  omniVERSE: beyond the universe
>   http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.htm
>  mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?PoV

Post a reply to this message