 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In the recent rendering I did of ST:Voyager (see povray.binaries.images) I
noticed something interesting. The Voyager model (Jorg Gerlach's excellent
model) converted from 3DS format has about 80000 triangles. On a Windows box
I with an AMD K-6 II 3D and 64 MB of RAM I can get this to render only if I
shut down my machine, close everything unecessary down, and then it will
only render the scene three or four times before memory becomes so
fragmented and un-freed that I get strange memory errors and have to shut
down again.
However, if I run using the command line under Linux, I can run and run and
run. My Linux box is an AMD K6 with 64 MB RAM also. On the Linux box I can
also hit Ctrl-C and shut down immediately. If I select the Stop button in
the POV-Ray "IDE" on Windows I get disk thrashing for about ten minutes
before I can go back and try again. Note that I have about 75 MB swap space
(preallocated and static) on the Windows box and 64 MB swap space set up on
the Linux box.
Just thought you'd be interested.
Jon
====================================================
Jon & Frances Berndt
email: jsb### [at] hal-pc org, fan### [at] hal-pcorg
WWW: http://www.hal-pc.org/~jsb
League City, TX
====================================================
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jon Berndt <jsb### [at] hal-pcorg> wrote:
: However, if I run using the command line under Linux, I can run and run and
: run.
It's very known that the memory management in Linux is a lot better than
in Windows.
The other "side-effect" of better memory management is that things usually
run faster.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It's very known that the memory management in Linux is a lot better than
> in Windows.
> The other "side-effect" of better memory management is that things usually
> run faster.
However, I think, it could be not only the memory management of windows
that makes it slow! If you kill the pov engine by CTRL-ALT-DEL and kill
the process in the upcoming box, the memory is almost immediately freed.
Therefore I'm wondering what pov does if you stop a render and I think
it must be also possible under windows to stop a render immediately
without disk thrashing (however not several minutes, if it could be some
seconds; see killing the povengine). But I may be mistaken.
Yours
Axel Baune
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The same thing happens when using MAX. If I start a really huge render and
then exit it sometimes takes a few minutes to free all the disk swap space
it's allocated in the windows virtual memory swap file. Although if I kill
it through Ctrl+Alt+Del it will free it all immediately. I think this is
just a windows memory issue in general.
--
Lance.
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
Axel Baune <aba### [at] neuroinformatikuni-ulmde> wrote in message
news:384B950F.D6A12A88@neuro.informatik.uni-ulm.de...
> > It's very known that the memory management in Linux is a lot better
than
> > in Windows.
> > The other "side-effect" of better memory management is that things
usually
> > run faster.
>
> However, I think, it could be not only the memory management of windows
> that makes it slow! If you kill the pov engine by CTRL-ALT-DEL and kill
> the process in the upcoming box, the memory is almost immediately freed.
> Therefore I'm wondering what pov does if you stop a render and I think
> it must be also possible under windows to stop a render immediately
> without disk thrashing (however not several minutes, if it could be some
> seconds; see killing the povengine). But I may be mistaken.
>
> Yours
> Axel Baune
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, that's just Windows being slow and stupid as usual.
--
David http://thunder.prohosting.com/~davidf (ICQ 55354965)
"The paper holds their folded faces to the floor" -Pink Floyd
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Well, that's just Windows being slow and stupid as usual.
Oh give it a rest till the end of the year will ya ! If you don't like
Microsoft Windows fine, don't use it. I'm getting real tired of people
talking about it all of the time. If you can't be more contructive in
your replies to questions like these don't bother replying.
-- A Disgruntled Postal Worker
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 20:38:44 -0800, Ken wrote:
>
>
>David Fontaine wrote:
>>
>> Well, that's just Windows being slow and stupid as usual.
>
>Oh give it a rest till the end of the year will ya !
But it's not really the end of the year until 2001. Or something.
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>But it's not really the end of the year until 2001. Or something.
Whoa, whoa, whoa... when did we change to Martian years?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> >But it's not really the end of the year until 2001. Or something.
>
> Whoa, whoa, whoa... when did we change to Martian years?
You mean you didn't hear about the invasion?
Ken Matassa
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 21:36:29 -0800, Ken Matassa <kma### [at] pacbellnet>
wrote:
>TonyB wrote:
>>
>> >But it's not really the end of the year until 2001. Or something.
>>
>> Whoa, whoa, whoa... when did we change to Martian years?
>
>You mean you didn't hear about the invasion?
Sshh! He's not supposed to know!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
