Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

"Out of memory..." error


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 19 October 2009 - 14:44

«Out of memory…» error

Recently, some users have encountered with this error … It is time to talk about it in detail.

The reason for this error – not enough of virtual computer memory, which in any configuration is 2Gb.

I draw your attention to the phrase “a virtual computer memory”. No matter how much physical memory cards are installed on your machine - there may be any number – the application uses only 2 GB of virtual memory cause that is permitted by OS Win32, regardless of the overall RAM amount, which can be up to 6 GB. This is done to ensure that all users who have a Win32-OS computer have an opportunity to play the game.

What should I do to avoid this error?
The golden rule - do not violate the following restrictions. Namely:

For DServer hosters:
1. In a mission there should be not more than 3 different aircraft types for one coalition, i.e. the maximum number of different aircraft types for both sodes - 6.
2. All aircrafts’ skins should be default ones. In this case, application will be using the smallest possible amount of hoster’s computer virtual memory. As an example, every real default skin "eats" about 5Mb of memory, i.e. if a mission has 4 SPADs, each with default skin, it will be equal only to 5Mb of memory, because skins are the same and they are loaded once (in the beginning) and are assigned to all 4 SPADs. Conversely, if these 4 SPADs are Иdressed’ in different skins, we will need to have more than 20Mb of hoster’s memory to display these four different skins, and the same amount of client’s (player) memory.
3. The maximum total number of aircrafts in a mission at any moment of time shall not exceed 30. This number includes both planes controlled by humans and planes controlled by AI.
4. In addition to aircrafts, there should be not more than 4 different types of ground objects per coalition (cars, trains, antiaircraft guns, cannons, balloons, etc.), i.e. maximum number of different types of ground objects for both sides – 8.
5. The maximum total number of ground objects shall not exceed 40 pieces.
6. At least once a day it is necessary to reboot a host computer.

It is also necessary to remember that the additional amount of virtual memory is consumed on the reproduction of various effects (tracers, fire, smoke, shoot, etc.), as well as on different sounds.

For the players (clients):
Everything that is written below is not required, but desirable.
1. If possible, unload from memory all third-party software (anti-virus, email applications, etc.).
2. For weak computers that meet only the minimum requirements of the game, it is desirable to use low quality audio and low quality textures (can be set in Settings.exe).
3. When continuously playing during a long time, it is desirable to reboot the computer at least once in 3-4 hours.

In case of observance of the abovementioned conditions and restrictions, the problem «out of memory …» errors should not occur.

Sincerely, Lefty-neoqb
  • 0

#2 TX-Thunderbolt

TX-Thunderbolt
  • Posts: 1436

Posted 19 October 2009 - 15:02

Interesting.

Thanks Lefty.
  • 0

#3 Chill31

Chill31
  • Posts: 1891

Posted 19 October 2009 - 15:53

Set this as an announcement so everyone is sure to see it
  • 0

#4 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 19 October 2009 - 16:03

3. When continuously playing during a long time, it is desirable to reboot the computer at least once in 3-4 hours

errr…is this because of a memory leak in RoF? Or because of Windows XP "behaviour"?
  • 0

#5 Winkle

Winkle
  • Posts: 85

Posted 19 October 2009 - 16:32

3. When continuously playing during a long time, it is desirable to reboot the computer at least once in 3-4 hours

errr…is this because of a memory leak in RoF? Or because of Windows XP "behaviour"?

Are all these "fixes" temporay or permanet?
  • 0

#6 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 19 October 2009 - 17:35

3. When continuously playing during a long time, it is desirable to reboot the computer at least once in 3-4 hours

errr…is this because of a memory leak in RoF? Or because of Windows XP "behaviour"?

Are all these "fixes" temporay or permanet?

For a Coperative Mode it's permanent so far… For a DF Mode it will be completely different…
  • 0

#7 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 19 October 2009 - 17:36

3. When continuously playing during a long time, it is desirable to reboot the computer at least once in 3-4 hours

errr…is this because of a memory leak in RoF? Or because of Windows XP "behaviour"?

Second one is right…
  • 0

#8 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 19 October 2009 - 17:37

Set this as an announcement so everyone is sure to see it

Ok. Will do so…
  • 0

#9 Gustang

Gustang
  • Posts: 81

Posted 19 October 2009 - 17:42

3. The maximum total number of aircrafts in a mission at any moment of time shall not exceed 30. This number includes both planes controlled by humans and planes controlled by AI.
4. In addition to aircrafts, there should be not more than 4 different types of ground objects per coalition (cars, trains, antiaircraft guns, cannons, balloons, etc.), i.e. maximum number of different types of ground objects for both sides – 8.
5. The maximum total number of ground objects shall not exceed 40 pieces.

Thanks for the info, Lefty. Do these guidelines take into consideration the aircraft and objects that are disabled at mission begin? In other words, if a mission has 15 active aircraft at start and 15 of them are disabled (until the 15 active are gone), has the quota been filled? If not, what is the limit on aircraft and vehicles that are not "enabled" at mission start?
  • 0

#10 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 19 October 2009 - 18:04


Thanks for the info, Lefty. Do these guidelines take into consideration the aircraft and objects that are disabled at mission begin? In other words, if a mission has 15 active aircraft at start and 15 of them are disabled (until the 15 active are gone), has the quota been filled? If not, what is the limit on aircraft and vehicles that are not "enabled" at mission start?

Well… Let's talk…
Deactivated objects (aircraft, ground objects) doesn't mean it's not downloded… It's still will "sitting" in your PC memory and "waits" for the other future order (comands) - so, it "eats" your memory anyway, even if it not showned in game… So, for the whole time of your missions these restrictions are important…
Is that the answer?
  • 0

#11 Gustang

Gustang
  • Posts: 81

Posted 19 October 2009 - 18:16

So, for the whole time of your missions these restrictions are important…
Is that the answer?

I believe so. If I understand correctly, the total maximum number of aircraft in a co-op mission, active or inactive combined, shall not exceed 30. Is this correct?

Is there any performance advantage for starting an aircraft or vehicle with a status of not enabled?
  • 0

#12 Marco_._

Marco_._
  • Posts: 2594

Posted 19 October 2009 - 18:26

talking about optimisation of the game :lol:

OMG
  • 0

#13 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 19 October 2009 - 19:02

Honestly, i think different planes per side shouldn't exceed 3 anyway. 30 planes max is fine aswell (haven't seen more than 20).

Of course everyone wants to have a nice skin (forget about customs) and that should be the main problem. It might make sense to reduce the skin files used for multiplayer to 1024x1024 (opposed to 2048x2048). Graphic quality would decrease of course, but 5 MB per every plane with customs skins, that's a lot.
  • 0

#14 ThomasH

ThomasH
  • Posts: 151

Posted 19 October 2009 - 19:58

Why not introduce 1024x1024 as an option both for offline & online use?
  • 0

#15 Masaq

Masaq
  • Posts: 511

Posted 19 October 2009 - 20:56

Tactics & Teamwork will do our best to ensure that our server meets those recomendations, however it'll take a week at least to ensure we meet them fully.

Thanks for the information Lefty. Are there any plans to implement a LARGEADDRESSAWARE flag for rof.exe to help resolve this issue for 64-bit systems?


Graphic quality would be 1/4 of what it is currently of course, but 5 MB per every plane with customs skins, that's a lot.


Fix'd that for you :) Oh, and that's exactly what the "TEXTURES" setting in the launcher will do; instead of rendering the 2048^2 texture at close range (highest setting), it'll render the 1024^2 or even the 512^2. Or at least, that's how it almost certainly (probably) handles different texture settings, at least for aircraft.
  • 0

#16 Chill31

Chill31
  • Posts: 1891

Posted 19 October 2009 - 21:01

MattM (and others), 5 MB per plane in a 24 plane server would be 120 MB total. This about 5% of your 2 GB mem capacity. Is that a significant amount? 5% doesnt seem like much to me…then again, I'd love to make 5% interest right now…
  • 0

#17 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 19 October 2009 - 22:04

It would be 99 MB less.

No it wouldn't be that much, but i think it's still better than default skins for every plane.

And also, you have to start somewhere. It's not like there is something that requires like 1.5 GB and the rest is for the skins.

Oh, and that's exactly what the "TEXTURES" setting in the launcher will do; instead of rendering the 2048^2 texture at close range (highest setting), it'll render the 1024^2 or even the 512^2
But it would still load those 5 MB into the memory, would it not? Ingame performance would be different, but memory usage would be the same. Unless i'm mistaken, it's too late to think about this.
  • 0

#18 Trouble4u

Trouble4u
  • Posts: 89

Posted 19 October 2009 - 23:01

Well this is very sad news indeed. There must be some thing that can be done?

Wow I don't think it would feel any different if I just found out I was only allowed to drive my Challenger 25mph. :cry:
  • 0

#19 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 19 October 2009 - 23:57

Could you guys not add Large-Address-Aware-Flag to the ROF.exe? This usually works in most programs and that way, 64-bis OS users would have no problem (using up to 4 GB for ROF) and 32-bit OS users with the 3 GB switch could use about 3 GB. That's atleast 1 GB more and should be enough to counter this problem anyway.

Even if it doesn't work, there's no real reason to not set the Large-Address-Aware-Flag.
  • 0

#20 Chill31

Chill31
  • Posts: 1891

Posted 20 October 2009 - 00:25

Would someone please educate me on the 3GB switch or link me to some info? I have windows XP pro if that matters
  • 0

#21 WW1EAF_Ming

WW1EAF_Ming
  • Posts: 2565

Posted 20 October 2009 - 08:22

Could you guys not add Large-Address-Aware-Flag to the ROF.exe?

Matt I think you mean to say

'Please add the Large-Address-Aware-Flag to the ROF.exe'

"Could you not do that!" means please do not do it

The simpler the better where it matters.

Ming
  • 0

#22 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 20 October 2009 - 10:45

Yeah sorry about that. Anyway, add that flag, that takes 10 seconds (if you can't do that, i could and send you the ROF.exe). Then change the DRM checksum for that ROF.exe.

And you might wanna do that before releasing the new update.

Would someone please educate me on the 3GB switch or link me to some info? I have windows XP pro if that matters
This only matters if you have 32-bit OS, if you have a 64-bit XP, you don't need this.

Open the "Boot.ini" located in "c:\" (it's most likely "hidden" and read-only, so you have to change that to edit that file).

You will find something like this at the bottom of the file:

multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /NoExecute=OptIn

Make it look like this

multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /NoExecute=OptIn /3GB /userva=2800

And you will use up to 2800 MB per user application, if you want even more, you could change the userva=2800 to userva= 2990 or something, but the higher the number, the more unstable it gets usually, so i would recommend the 2800. But that would still not work if they don't add the flag i mentioned above, which limits the application to 2 GB.
  • 0

#23 AI-Neoqb

AI-Neoqb
  • Posts: 1697

Posted 20 October 2009 - 11:57



'Please add the Large-Address-Aware-Flag to the ROF.exe'

Ming

Gentlemen!

Thanks for you offer to help with adding that flag in ROF.exe – of course we know how to do it! ;)
I’m afraid it’s going to disappoint you but as I said before – 2Gb limit will be equal for everybody.
It’ll be like this until amount of Win32 users is bigger than the others. We do not want to split the community apart for these who will be able to play a huge mission (using up to 6 Gb of memory) and for these, who won’t (Win32 users), or we do?

And one more thing: if a host PC uses default skins and a player in this mission wearing a desirable one – it means 5Mb for host PC and 10Mb for player’s PC. That’s why we recommend to use default skins only for host PC.
  • 0

#24 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 20 October 2009 - 12:28

The flag won't separate Win32 and Win64 users. It can only improve the performance for both (for 32bit users if they add the 3 GB switch only) or do nothing at all. It won't hinder Win32 users from starting ROF. All users can only benefit from that, i don't understand why you don't set the flag.
  • 0

#25 ZaltysZ

ZaltysZ
  • Posts: 1638

Posted 20 October 2009 - 13:23

Community is already split. ;) There some people whose computers takes so much time in loading mission that it is enough for others to load the same mission, choose aircraft, ban someone for not pressing ready and start playing. Imagine how it is irritating to join in the middle of the mission, wait for its end, wait while new mission is loaded and see that the game have already started. :( Also people with faster systems have better chance to choose wanted plane or at least get free slot. So, 2GB limit because of equality does not seem firm, especially when most RoF "capable" PCs have at least 4GB of RAM.
  • 0

#26 Chill31

Chill31
  • Posts: 1891

Posted 20 October 2009 - 14:52

Zalty, You are thinking in the past in regard to load times. Dogfight/Respawn will change the way this game works and the way it is played.

I agree with what LEFY said (with the understanding that it is either 2GB or 6GB only, no in between) since I dont want people to make 6GB missions that I get kicked every time I play. If they could tweak it to 2.8GB, I would be ok with that.
  • 0

#27 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 20 October 2009 - 15:02

with the understanding that it is either 2GB or 6GB only, no in between
I would agree with that also, if that was the case, but it's not.

Like i said before the flag would do nothing but improve the performance, it won't make some users unable to run ROF.
  • 0

#28 ZaltysZ

ZaltysZ
  • Posts: 1638

Posted 20 October 2009 - 15:07

It will in the past, when it will be changed. ;)

And from where 6GB came from? largeaddressaware flag only allows 32bit process to use up to 4GB of RAM with 64bit OS and up to 3GB with 32bit OS. There is no way 32bit process can use over 4GB of RAM at the same time, so 6GB does not fit here. Also, this flag only rises the upper limit of RAM process can use and not the requirement of RAM.
  • 0

#29 Chill31

Chill31
  • Posts: 1891

Posted 20 October 2009 - 15:12

I'm not too good with the tech side…

Please explain: if I join a server playing a 6GB mission (64 bit system) and I only have 32 bit system, what will happen to my ability to play?
  • 0

#30 ZaltysZ

ZaltysZ
  • Posts: 1638

Posted 20 October 2009 - 15:23

I'm not too good with the tech side…

Please explain: if I join a server playing a 6GB mission (64 bit system) and I only have 32 bit system, what will happen to my ability to play?

It is hypothetical situation, because RoF can't use 6GB in any way now (even with largeaddressaware flag). It can change only if they will release 64bit version of RoF, but it won't be in near future. Anyway, if you joined a server running mission which required 6GB of RAM with 32 bit OS, you would get the same error we get now with mission requiring more than 2GB of RAM.
  • 0

#31 Vati

Vati
  • Posts: 820

Posted 20 October 2009 - 15:40

Gentlemen!

Thanks for you offer to help with adding that flag in ROF.exe – of course we know how to do it! ;)
I’m afraid it’s going to disappoint you but as I said before – 2Gb limit will be equal for everybody.
It’ll be like this until amount of Win32 users is bigger than the others. We do not want to split the community apart for these who will be able to play a huge mission (using up to 6 Gb of memory) and for these, who won’t (Win32 users), or we do?

And one more thing: if a host PC uses default skins and a player in this mission wearing a desirable one – it means 5Mb for host PC and 10Mb for player’s PC. That’s why we recommend to use default skins only for host PC.
Could you please explain what is the reason that there is no option to use downscaled texture sizes? What I did in one game project I worked on was simply to load lower mip level resolution if memory limit would cause problems and memory savings were huge. Sure it might not be as pretty, but I prefer a little lower res. textures over playing game which cannot keep up with the standard MP modes at this age. 512x512 textures for MP are more than enough and would result in 4x more planes for same texture memory footprint.
  • 0

#32 MiG-77

MiG-77
  • Posts: 2651

Posted 20 October 2009 - 16:24

It is hypothetical situation, because RoF can't use 6GB in any way now (even with largeaddressaware flag). It can change only if they will release 64bit version of RoF, but it won't be in near future. Anyway, if you joined a server running mission which required 6GB of RAM with 32 bit OS, you would get the same error we get now with mission requiring more than 2GB of RAM.

True, but I think Chill31 point was that 64bit OS and 32bit OS still could have difference (4GB vs 3GB) and that was probably what Lefty ment by " We do not want to split the community apart…". Also I think 6GB comes from that you need atleast that much of system memory if OS is going to be able to free 4GB to single application.
  • 0

#33 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 20 October 2009 - 18:29

512x512 textures for MP are more than enough and would result in 4x more planes for same texture memory footprint.
1024x1024 would result in 4x as many planes. 512x512 would be x16.

But honestly, i think 1024x1024 would be fine. Atleast for multiplayer. But then again i don't see NeoQb downgrading the graphics in one of the future updates. Imagine the people complaining about worse graphic than before. So that's no easy option.

True, but I think Chill31 point was that 64bit OS and 32bit OS still could have difference (4GB vs 3GB)
It's like saying, reduce graphic to IL2 level, because some people have faster system than others.

If the people would use the 3 GB switch, there would be no difference between 32bit and 64bit OS, because ROF would not even touch those 2800 MB or whatever, it rarely get's over the 2 GB limit right now (i've seen it twice). It has always been that way, if you have a slow system, don't join 64 player servers, that's how it works on almost every other game.
  • 0

#34 Vati

Vati
  • Posts: 820

Posted 20 October 2009 - 18:43

1024x1024 would result in 4x as many planes. 512x512 would be x16.

But honestly, i think 1024x1024 would be fine. Atleast for multiplayer. But then again i don't see NeoQb downgrading the graphics in one of the future updates. Imagine the people complaining about worse graphic than before. So that's no easy option.
Yes, I was thinking 1024 but wrote 512. Lapsus…
As people complaining. Why? If you have enough ram, you get full resolution. If you dont, program compensates automatically. There is no need to have extra textures either. All data is already ready, all it needs is some smart coding to make it happen. Many would not even notice the difference as player own plane would still be at full resolution.
  • 0

#35 PP_Nobody96

PP_Nobody96
  • Posts: 180

Posted 08 November 2009 - 11:45

I think its to early to complain about performance issues. As a programmer, i know that you cannot speed up a program until it is done or you screw up code maintainability. RoF will become faster because the SDK is becoming stable and they can hunt down bugs much easier.
The game is sold, so it should be finished, someone might think, but seen realisticly, there is no such thing as finished software.

I have played IL2 several years. In this time there were a steady flow of bugs found an patches to fix them. Seeing the work neoqb has done in the last couple of mounth, the effort they have taken to link with the community and things that are to come in the near future, i belife i will play RoF several years more. This game make a lot of fun right now and will get even better with the time.

There are things like the absence of linux dedicated servers and the need for dedicated servers to have their own key. The absence of a option to connect to a ip directly or the lack of a bugreporter that tells you what happend and not just that something happend, but as i written above, these things will get fixed. Just give it some time.

In my oppinion they are doing really great and are eager to become (or stay) the best flightsim ever.

.oO( it early, i am drinking my first coffee, so not everything i have written will make sense. hopefully a bit will :) )
  • 0

#36 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 08 November 2009 - 14:27

think its to early to complain about performance issues. As a programmer, i know that you cannot speed up a program until it is done or you screw up code maintainability. RoF will become faster because the SDK is becoming stable and they can hunt down bugs much easier.
The game is sold, so it should be finished, someone might think, but seen realisticly, there is no such thing as finished software.

I have played IL2 several years. In this time there were a steady flow of bugs found an patches to fix them. Seeing the work neoqb has done in the last couple of mounth, the effort they have taken to link with the community and things that are to come in the near future, i belife i will play RoF several years more. This game make a lot of fun right now and will get even better with the time.

There are things like the absence of linux dedicated servers and the need for dedicated servers to have their own key. The absence of a option to connect to a ip directly or the lack of a bugreporter that tells you what happend and not just that something happend, but as i written above, these things will get fixed. Just give it some time.

In my oppinion they are doing really great and are eager to become (or stay) the best flightsim ever.


well said!
  • 0

#37 Hedgehog

Hedgehog
  • Posts: 18

Posted 08 November 2009 - 15:14

Open the "Bios.ini" located in "c:\" (it's most likely "hidden" and read-only, so you have to change that to edit that file).
Is this possibly supposed to be "boot.ini"? I don't have a "bios.ini" file, but I do have the referenced program line in a file called "boot.ini".
  • 0

#38 MattM

MattM
  • Posts: 2595

Posted 08 November 2009 - 18:07

Correct, that was a typo. It's boot.ini.
  • 0

#39 Hedgehog

Hedgehog
  • Posts: 18

Posted 08 November 2009 - 22:32

So even after making that change, WinXP still reports only 2GB of my installed 4GB. Is that normal? Have I even accomplished anything useful be modifying the boot.ini file in this way?
  • 0

#40 Sensenmann

Sensenmann
  • Posts: 381

Posted 09 November 2009 - 17:31

Lefty,

In regards to the 8 ground objects we are allotted: is this restriction placed on AI controlled objects only (vehicles, artillery, etc.) or does this include static objects as well (tents, buildings, etc.)?

And in regards to trains: does the train count as a single object regardless of the carriages added, or is each additional car considered a separate object?
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users