31 December 2013, 11:30 | #21 |
Professional slacker!
|
Hi Toni,
I repeated the first test exactly using PFS3, I think it's the one bundled with Classic WB I have here (vers5.3) Memory usage as you can see is very similar! |
31 December 2013, 11:49 | #22 |
WinUAE developer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 49
Posts: 26,534
|
Thanks, it is time to check PFS3 sources
|
31 December 2013, 12:06 | #23 |
Professional slacker!
|
Cool! Let me know if you need a dump of the RDB before I nuke the CF
SFS seems to have similar memory usage, maybe a little less. When I set up CF's for 2mb Amiga's I always use FFS for this reason. Of course when you have luscious amounts of Fast Ram it isn't an issue! |
31 December 2013, 12:17 | #24 |
WinUAE developer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 49
Posts: 26,534
|
Found this:
Code:
/* sanity checks. If HDToolbox default of 30, then 150, * otherwise round in range 70 -- 600 */ if (i==30) i=150; if (i<MIN_BUFFERS) i = MIN_BUFFERS; if (i>MAX_BUFFERS) i = MAX_BUFFERS; (MIN_BUFFERS is 10 in PFS3AIO, not 70) |
31 December 2013, 12:37 | #25 |
Professional slacker!
|
Usage is slightly better with 31 buffers, now 589032 in use however I had 80 buffers in my last test that had 620712 usage.
|
31 December 2013, 20:02 | #26 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
Glad to see some progress and that it wasn't me being an idiot, rather some sort of problem! I can't believe I didn't notice in my real Amiga though. Maybe because I have 2MB of RAM and I never get into Workbench.
Then again i haven't tested in it again, gotta get to it once I fix this faulty picoPSU I received [edit] tested on my real A600 with 1MB chip, indeed 600+KB are being eaten up! Last edited by Amiga1992; 31 December 2013 at 20:32. |
01 January 2014, 10:40 | #27 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 1,341
|
This must be what I ran across too. I had put my A600 away and wasn't yet able to check the exact amount of memory taken but the results here sound about the same.
|
02 January 2014, 14:10 | #28 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
Yup sounds about right, has to be a PFS3 problem then.
Is there anything I can do to help sort out this problem? Should I switch back to FFS? (UGH) |
02 January 2014, 14:51 | #29 |
PSPUAE DEV
|
|
02 January 2014, 14:55 | #30 |
Professional slacker!
|
|
02 January 2014, 15:40 | #31 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
|
02 January 2014, 15:47 | #32 |
WinUAE developer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 49
Posts: 26,534
|
I am going to debug and hopefully it can be fixed/worked around.
I have already quickly checked PFS3 sources for all memory allocations, but didn't notice anything that could allocate that much memory. Buffer cache also seems to work as expected. |
02 January 2014, 19:35 | #33 |
WinUAE developer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 49
Posts: 26,534
|
I tried my PFS3 (official 18.5) 20M HDF and booted without startup-sequence it had about 710k of RAM free (out of 1M), with 80 buffers so it does not always use "too much" memory.
|
02 January 2014, 19:54 | #34 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
It might depend on the configuration, then.
Would the behaviour be the same whether it is an HDF or a real drive connected through USB? |
02 January 2014, 20:14 | #35 | |
WinUAE developer
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 49
Posts: 26,534
|
Quote:
HDF vs drive shouldn't make any difference. |
|
02 January 2014, 23:51 | #36 |
Professional slacker!
|
Something interesting.
If I set the RDB & partitions with 3.1's HDToolBox instead of 3.9's memory usage is less! So for PFS3-AIO, 2 equal partitions, 31 buffers each: |
03 January 2014, 00:04 | #37 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
I don't remember what I used to set this one up, probably 3.x HDToolbox. I can try redoing it with 2.x HDToolbox.
|
03 January 2014, 08:00 | #38 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,005
|
I am still interested in analysing your RDB...
|
03 January 2014, 11:35 | #39 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2001
Location: ?
Posts: 19,646
|
OH sorry Thomas, I forgot because I ran into a bunch of other hardware trouble :/
I'll do it today and post it here. |
03 January 2014, 16:05 | #40 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: New York / USA
Posts: 360
|
If he's got a particularly large (or multiple) filesystem drives loaded in RDB, wouldn't they necessarily have to be loaded into RAM, possibly explaining the discrepancy? They have to go *somewhere*.
Rodney |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mounting of real hard disk doesn't work anymore | mikro | support.WinUAE | 6 | 13 May 2012 18:44 |
mapROM eats too much RAM | alphonsus | support.Hardware | 9 | 10 July 2008 01:16 |
differences in ram consuming winuae vs real 1200 | _ThEcRoW | support.WinUAE | 9 | 02 May 2006 13:01 |
Mounting .adf in RAM | lauri_t | project.ClassicWB | 9 | 30 April 2005 22:10 |
Mounting ADF files as disks on real amiga | dkovacs | support.Apps | 5 | 08 April 2005 16:57 |
|
|