Only the UV or UD developers could say for sure, but I'd venture to guess that multi-gigabyte sequential files weren't envisioned when the dimensioned array code was written. Maybe there's never been a request to revisit it. I quit using dimensioned arrays probably around the late 90's when faster hardware seemed to negate any performance advantage.
-John -----Original Message----- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Symeon Breen Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 12:59 PM To: 'U2 Users List' Subject: Re: [U2] OPENSEQ and Abnormal termination of UV Surely it is just a pointer to the file and the position in that file - i open many multi gigabyte files using openseq and i would not expect the udt process to allocate tens of Gig at that time for the readseq operations ... It should be a tiny piece of memory to act as a pointer !! ?? -----Original Message----- From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of John Hester Sent: 18 May 2010 20:31 To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] OPENSEQ and Abnormal termination of UV Reading my own response just made me realize what's going on. I think Jerry's response was right. I remember many years ago (I won't say how many) when we were on much slower hardware, explaining to a coworker that it was better to use dimensioned arrays when possible because they were faster to populate than dynamic arrays. The reason they're faster is because the necessary space for them is already reserved in memory. A dynamic array has to go out and find add'l memory each time you add to it. Looks like putting a sequential file in a dimensioned array makes it go out and reserve a block of memory the size of the entire file. If that's the case then making FILEVARS a dynamic array *should* work. -John _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
