<div style="text-align: left;" id="result_box" dir="ltr">Hi,<br><br>you activate this flag to compile the VTK? <br><br> also use python but not provided.<br><br><br>Regards,<br>Paulo<br></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
2009/1/17 Lassi Paavolainen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lopaavol@jyu.fi">lopaavol@jyu.fi</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, John Drescher wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 3:36 PM, John Drescher <<a href="mailto:drescherjm@gmail.com">drescherjm@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> >>> Is this a problem of memory fragmentation?<br>
> >>><br>
> >>> Jim<br>
> >><br>
> >> No it seems not to be as I can execute that non-VTK program and Python<br>
> >> wrapped VTK code in any which order and the result is always the same.<br>
> >><br>
> > It better be. However I do not believe that makes a difference to your<br>
> > situation. Every program gets its own clean address space when you<br>
> > execute it.<br>
> ><br>
> > As far as address space fragmentation, unless you use the /3GB flag<br>
> > and link with LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE the maximum single allocation I have<br>
> > found in windows programs ( compiled with VS and no VTK) is around<br>
> > 1.2GB. The reason is that windows loads its dlls inside of the same<br>
> > 2GB of address space that you are allocating memory from so this<br>
> > reduces the maximum size of the block you can allocate. Running python<br>
> > probably makes this worse by the python dlls being loaded at even<br>
> > lower addresses than the windows dlls.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> Here is a link about this:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://www.tech-archive.net/Archive/Development/microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel/2005-04/msg00457.html" target="_blank">http://www.tech-archive.net/Archive/Development/microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel/2005-04/msg00457.html</a><br>
><br>
> John<br>
<br>
</div>Thanks John. I'll check that and test with those flags.<br>
<br>
By the way, I was able to get about 1.9 GB on a program compiled with VS<br>
and no VTK. Using VTK it dropped to 1.2 GB on Vista and to little over 700<br>
MB on Windows XP Pro. There seems to be some difference between Vista and<br>
XP as those tests were ran using exactly same compiled code. XP and Vista<br>
probably load dlls in memory differently. I remember to read somewhere<br>
that on some XPs there were a bug with some dlls that were load to address<br>
at 1 GB which of course makes it impossible to allocate a block over 1GB.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Lassi<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
This is the private VTK discussion list.<br>
Please keep messages on-topic. Check the FAQ at: <a href="http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK_FAQ" target="_blank">http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/VTK_FAQ</a><br>
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:<br>
<a href="http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtkusers" target="_blank">http://www.vtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vtkusers</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>