comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive

Home » Public Forums » archive » IDL memory usage

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: IDL memory usage [message #37638 is a reply to message #9080]

Tue, 13 January 2004 17:04

Michael Wallace
Messages: 409
Registered: December 2003

Senior Member

> However, this may not have the desired behavior. Once the program
> reaches the limit, any further memory allocations will fail and may
> wreak havoc on your program. It won't just run "slower."

In this particular case, I don't believe anything will be creating
havoc. I did a little test. First, I ran IDL without much else going
on. Eventually, it filled up most of the available memory. Once
finished, I opened up a bunch of other programs which chewed up a good
chunk of memory. I then ran my same IDL program again. It again filled
up most of the available memory, but it had nowhere near the amount that
it had the first time around (since other programs had already claimed
some of that) and it still executed in about the same time. So, this
led me to conclude that I might be able to safely limit the IDL process
and not run into any problems. Also, I was periodically printing out
the IDL memory usage from within IDL and it leveled off early on and
never grew over the rest of the execution even though you could watch
more and more memory being taken from the OS during this same time.

I will try limit/ulimit and see what happens. Thanks.

Mike

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		IDL memory usage By: Gary Fu on Wed, 28 May 1997 00:00
		Re: IDL memory usage By: R.G. Stockwell on Wed, 14 January 2004 07:07
		Re: IDL memory usage By: Michael Wallace on Tue, 13 January 2004 17:04
		Re: IDL memory usage By: Craig Markwardt on Tue, 13 January 2004 15:24

Previous Topic:	Group leader question
Next Topic:	Re: Group leader question

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 15 15:28:43 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.36598 seconds