Login    Forum    Register    Search    FAQ

Board index » HELP AND ADVICE » GAME/SOFTWARE/HARDWARE PROBLEMS




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: wtf does this mean?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:51 am 
Offline
Bow down to the master

Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 8:24 pm
Posts: 1233
running supreme commander right is a right sytem hog even today despite the fact that its 2 years old. Anyway, looked up help to make it run better (in vista 64) and encountered this....



X64 OS:
A 64 bit OS is also limited to 2GB for user-mode virtual application space for a single process until the Large_Address_Aware header is in place in the executable. So on x64 run the startme.bat batch file, that is all you need to do for x64 to allow SupCom to use >2GB and up to 4GB on x64.


the above is utterly meaningless to me..can someone please explain it?

_________________
Image


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: wtf does this mean?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:55 am 
Offline
it is I! Diabetes man!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 1:15 pm
Posts: 14174
Location: anywhere but nowhere
dunno but....


http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1031344616


ps ..i got hard reading it..

_________________
Image



Image
Went to a zoo, they only had one animal there, a dog............. It was a shitzu....



I’z leakin… bring amberlamps


Top 
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: wtf does this mean?
 Post Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 2:30 am 
Offline
Ostracised!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 3:41 pm
Posts: 9042
Location: cooking nades in the backyard
it means that windows can standard only assign up to 2gb of memory to any given program, supcom hits that limit and crashes

the startme.bat file would change something (a bat file is like a recording of typed in commands in dos) to allow windows to assign more ram, extending the time before supcom would crash :)

apparantly though, it's not all that safe, it could make other programs crash, prevent booting, ...


Quote:
there are problems on both the application and kernel side of things. On the application side, a common poor programming practice has been to always assume that an application will only be dealing with 2GB of user space; code that makes this assumption will likely error if more than 2GB of user space is actually available. This is avoidable by following proper programming practices, but as a safety precaution even with additional virtual address space allocated to user space Windows still defaults to limiting an application to 2GB. Only finally, if an application indicates to Windows that it is capable of handling more than 2GB, via the "/LARGEADDRESSAWARE" flag, may it have access to any space above 2GB.

As for the kernel, having had up to half of its space taken away must now find a way to live in a smaller space. The (in)ability of any specific system/Windows configuration to deal with this is why the 3gb switch is considered dangerous, seldom recommended, and just generally a bad idea. The biggest culprit here is drivers that run in kernel space. Like applications, they may assume that there's an entire 2GB of address space to work with, except unlike applications this space gets smaller instead of bigger.

Windows' own memory needs can also cause problems with the reduced kernel space. As we mentioned before, space is required for the kernel to do a multitude of things, if a lot of space is required - video cards with a lot of memory are a particular offender here - then everything needing space may not fit in the kernel space. Because there are no strong safeguards against these conditions it may cause a failure to boot or system instability, especially if the culprit is a driver that is well enough behaved to boot. Many modern drivers from hardware vendors that deal with enterprise-level hardware are capable of handling this, many more consumer hardware drivers are not. Stability concerns are the number one reason that breaking the 2GB barrier on a 32bit version of Windows is not recommended.

There is also a second concern however: performance. While an individual application may benefit from more user space in which to work, the kernel now has less space to cache data (as non-obvious as this may seem given all the addresses are virtual) and this can in theory hurt performance.

_________________
The banhammer thirsts for tards | There is no 'overkill'. There is only 'open fire' and 'I need to reload'.


Top 
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

Board index » HELP AND ADVICE » GAME/SOFTWARE/HARDWARE PROBLEMS


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests

 
 

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
  • Shoutbox
  • Shout Message


test
cron