OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical > Setup & Installation

How to have quantity and quality of memory

<< < (6/7) > >>

Pete:
Hi roberto

Thought I would try your settings on my ArcaOS 5.0.5 installation which seems to have memory problems not present with either the 5.0.1 or 5.0.4 installations on the same system.

I was already using VIRTUALADDRESSLIMIT=2048 and do not have java1.1 or 1.3 installed so did not add the SET JAVA_HIGH_MEMORY=1 line.

All I changed in fact was SWAPPATH=L:\OS2\SYSTEM 2048 2048 to SWAPPATH=C:\OS2\SYSTEM 2048 409600

This has made a huge difference to ArcaOS 5.0.5 as I can now use the system all day without running into the memory problems previously experienced with OpenOffice. Thanks for the tip  :-)

The question is: Why should increasing the size of the swap file resolve the memory issues?

I doubt the swap file gets used as ArcaOS "sees" the following installed RAM and I tend to only have 1 "major" app (openoffice , seamonkey) open at a time:-

[L:\SYS\BIN]mem /v

Total physical memory:      4,067 MB
Accessible to system:       3,315 MB
Additional (PAE) memory:      751 MB

Resident memory:              139 MB
Available virtual memory:     389 MB

Available process memory:
  Private low memory:         279 MB
  Private high memory:      1,189 MB
  Shared low memory:          215 MB
  Shared high memory:         868 MB


Another question is: Why does this memory problem affect 5.0.5 but not 5.0.1 or 5.0.4 installations on the same hardware? - Has something changed (for the worse) in memory management in 5.0.5?


Regards

Pete


Lars:
I have experienced the same (with 16 GB of installed memory !) and I would think that is an error in OS/2's memory management. I am using eCS, therefore I don't think this has anything to do with ArcaOS in particular.

I wouldn't be surprised if the memory manager checked IF some allocated memory could go into the swap file (after possibly increasing the swap file) even without actually doing so.
The MEMMAN directive has a COMMIT parameter that unconditionally allocates SWAP space (even if swapping would not be necessary) which kind of brings me to this conclusion. Maybe OS/2 expects some minimum of swap space to exist (even if unused) or some such. Or, with the invention of high memory, there was some bug introduced that improperly handles swapping under certain conditions.

It would not be the only error in OS/2's memory management. Think about high shared memory not getting freed when a DLL (using high shared memory) gets unloaded.

roberto:
 Pete
 SET JAVA_HIGH_MEMORY=1
It seems that you are right and that it is better without a java set ... The funny thing is that when I looked at it with this
 line it was approximately 100mb more. Not now. I have removed it and the memory remains, I do not understand it,
  but if it is so better.
  In your case it seems that the swapp shows little memory, try reducing it from 409600 to 20480 or another smaller number.
   You should find a suitable number to have swapp and increase the virtual memory. I think, but what works best for you
    will undoubtedly be the best.


Lars
Your comment that there may be an error in how to manage the OS / 2 memory, but after what I have seen of the operation
 it seems to me that it is perfect. It is not that some or many applications do not know how to manage memory correctly.

 You talk about problems in high memory, although the same problems but worse are with low memory.
  Before when I went to the memory lowers to zero the system would break, not now.
  The other day I was struck with low memory, which could not reduce it from a number 2368,
  no matter how many applications it opened. But by closing them all, and opening them again then I go down to zero.
  For me the failure is in the applications. 2368 is the right thing.
  Something similar can happen in high memory.   ** When programs are closed the memory fail**.
  I'm glad it works for you. But you can tell us what number you have in the swapp and how much virtual memory the mem / v
   shows you
saludos

roberto:
Pete
 SET JAVA_HIGH_MEMORY=1
I had to put it back, because it lost the stability of the system.
saludos

Pete:
Hi All

My 5.0.1, 5.0.4 and 5.0.5 installations did not seem to need the JAVA setting as they were working well.

However, I needed to change the motherboard as it had developed a memory controller fault: all installed OS's - including Windows7 - could only see and access 50% of the installed RAM ie in my previous message I posted the output of mem /v but this was with 4 x 2GB sticks of RAM installed and recognised by motherboard BIOS. I also tried memtest which could only test 50% of installed RAM.

Having changed the motherboard( from Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 to Asus M5A99X EVO R2.0 - no driver changes involved, very similar motherboards) and with 4 x 2 GB sticks of RAM installed mem /v now shows

[L:\SYS\BIN]mem /v

Total physical memory:      8,128 MB
Accessible to system:       3,536 MB
Additional (PAE) memory:    4,591 MB

Resident memory:              161 MB
Available virtual memory:     628 MB

Available process memory:
  Private low memory:         303 MB
  Private high memory:      1,344 MB
  Shared low memory:          242 MB
  Shared high memory:       1,109 MB

[L:\SYS\BIN]


Sadly that has actually made things worse as I now cannot run Openoffice at all, just get a message that module(s) cannot be loaded. Using the Quickstart results in the same (or very similar) message "Critical error: DosLoadModule failed" with a DLL name, eg fwk.dll, when the Desktop loads.

There had been *no* software changes involved in the motherboard swap.

I have tried adjusting the value of SWAPPATH without any change in the ability to run Openoffice. Adding the JAVA setting does not help.

Other software does not seem to have the problem(s) that Openoffice has.

I may just remove 2 of the RAM sticks to see what happens...


Regards

Pete

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version