On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 1] Is it safe to assume that the memory usage for
> analog to process a set of cache files will be about
> the total of the size of those files? (e.g. the weekly
> report used 1.5GB -- the sum of all the cache file
> sizes).
>
No. Only if all the items in each of the cache files are distinct. The main
memory constraint is the total length of all the distinct names of all the
items.
> 2] Does anyone have advice as to how to reduce the
> memory usage (yes, we already have HOSTLOWMEM 2 and
> FILELOWMEM 2)? Do we need to turn off some reports?
> Does *LOWMEM 3 make a difference when processing from a
> cachefile?
Yes. HOSTLOWMEM 3 will probably help a lot.
> Can we reduce the data in the files? Will
> gzipping the files reduce the overall memory usage by
> analog?
>
No, only the disk space.
> Should we just run it on a 28GB box?
>
Absolutely!
--
Stephen Turner http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~sret1/
Statistical Laboratory, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1SB, England
"We can ask you to pay the full amount which you owe us if you:
(a) become bankrupt; or (b) die." Egg Credit Card Agreement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the analog-help mailing list. To unsubscribe from this
mailing list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe" in the main BODY OF THE MESSAGE.
List archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
