comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » IDL memory usage
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: IDL memory usage [message #37640 is a reply to message #9080] Tue, 13 January 2004 15:24 Go to previous message
Craig Markwardt is currently offline  Craig Markwardt
Messages: 1869
Registered: November 1996
Senior Member
Michael Wallace <mwallace.removethismunge@swri.edu.invalid> writes:
> Is there any way to set a maximum limit on the amount of memory an IDL
> process will use even if the machine running the code has more memory
> available? I have a process which uses a fairly constant amount of
> memory (in IDL), but IDL keeps claiming more and more memory from the OS
> as time goes on. I'd just like to cap the amount of memory IDL can get
> its grubby little hands on even if it means that my code will execute a
> little slower.

If you are running on Unix, you can limit the memory consumption by
using the limit or ulimit commands, depending on the shell you are
using. You would run one of these commands in the shell before
running IDL.

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."

Good luck,
Craig

--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@REMOVEcow.physics.wisc.edu
Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Group leader question
Next Topic: Re: Group leader question

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Sun Oct 12 09:47:11 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.04144 seconds