Thanks a lot for your explanation Gordon, I ended to the same conclusion, I'll need to go to a 64bits platform. I'll install an XP 64, and not a Linux David... :)
Thanks again ! On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Gordon Tomlinson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > > > There's many issues why you will struggle with this and no it's not just a > windows issues it effects other OS's some do a better job off moving the > issues forward but they will still crop up > > > > Simplest solution is to go to a 64bit OS with a good 8gb or more. > > > > There is another limitation you will hit on 32bit windows is you can only > have an address space per process of 1.8gb , other OS's such as Unix's and > Linux's do a much better job and get you near the true 32bit limit > > > > Another problem is that you need a contiguous memory area for malloc/new on > windows this is a big problem , > > > > Some of the reasons why this is an issue is that Windows has already eaten > up a chunk of the available memory, not only with programs , services , > dll's being loaded they sadly simply don't get then next serial memory > address, they may be load smack bang in the middle of the address space, so > straight away that can l half the size of the max malloc/new you can do. As > you load more programs more dll's the longer windows is running the more > fragmented the memory will get and the smaller the max malloc/new can create > will get lower, the MAC's OS's are the best at handling this sort of thing > and Linux is typically better than window's > > > > What you can try is all the normal traditional tips, only run [processes, > services that absolutely need to etc see > http://www.vis-sim.com/vega/vegafaq1.htm#f39 ( needs modernizing but the > gist is valid) > > > > This use be a big problem back in the heyday of IRIX, it would load is > system SO's(dll's) smack bang in the middle of memory the same for > programs. What had to be do there was to force the system to load its libs > either high or low and you has to rebase the loading address of all the SO's > your program used. > > > > You can do a similar thing in Windows and for all your dll's to re-base and > control were they load. If you do that the final trick is that as some as > your application starts you need to create the large memory stuff straight > away, otherwise your address space will get fragmented and your back to > square one > > > > At my company we have to handle multi-terra byte imagery and have to use > processes like I have described, so it can be done. you just need an > engineer that knows this hard stuff, thankfully we have an engineer that > does ;) and no you cannot have him ;) > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > *Gordon Tomlinson * > > Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > YIM/AIM : *gordon3dBrit* > MSN IM : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Website : *www.vis-sim.com www.gordontomlinson.com* > > __________________________________________________________ > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *David Callu > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:05 PM > *To:* OpenSceneGraph Users > *Subject:* Re: [osg-users] [Not OSG related question] Virtual memory > management on Windows > > > > power linux Serge ;-). > > Regards > David Callu > > 2008/6/25 Serge Lages <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi all, > > I have a question not related to OSG but I can't find any answer, and this > is something that some of you probably knows. That's why I try here to find > some help. > > Here is my problem : I have a big image database with some images larger > than 1.5Go uncompressed, and I fail to load them (Win XP SP2 32bits with > Visual Studio 8). My computer has 3Go of virtual memory and the option /3GB > is activated on the system. In this document (page 13) : > > http://actes.sstic.org/SSTIC05/Vulnerabilites_et_gestion_des_limites_memoire/SSTIC05-article-Delalleau-Vulnerabilites_et_gestion_des_limites_memoire.pdf > It says it's not possible to allocate more than 1.3Go in one call, and it's > actually the limit where it crashs. If I do 2 allocations of 1Go each, it > works, but 1 allocation of 1.4Go crashs... > > Has someone any idea if it's possible to change this limit ? My only hope > will be to make smaller images, or even to develop under Linux ? :) > Thanks in advance ! > > -- > Serge Lages > http://www.tharsis-software.com > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > > -- Serge Lages http://www.tharsis-software.com
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
