• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Help, please. (OOMs)

Bjoern

Bjoern

worst developer ever
I'm usually not the type who cries out for help regarding FSX and other stuff, but this issue is driving me insane.

I just wanted to take a short flight this evening, but noticed that FSX didn't have my add-on scenery loaded, so I added it into the scenery library.

The next time I wanted to fire up FSX I got this:

fsx_oom.jpg


The error message reads "Your computer has run out of...blah" - the classical FSX OOM.
The odd thing is FSX's Ram usage. This is normally way too little for this kind of error to happen.

Things I did so far:
- check for duplicate AFX files
- boot.ini: /3GB switch
- boot.ini: /userva=2560

Nothing worked.


So I'm a bit lost here. What the heck can I still try? Did anyone else get this?


Relevant information: FSX SP2, 4GB Ram, 4GB fixed page file, Windows XP Pro x64 SP2 (fresh installation)


A FSX reinstallation is not an option at all. Never!


In the past few weeks I've had nothing but trouble with OS'es (all 64bit). I haven't done anything I hadn't done when I still had XP32 and yet, I got random BSODs on perfectly healthy hardware (verified) and other issues.



- Edit:
Seems to be related to my AI traffic's flight plans folder (treated like an AFX/scenery folder). How come?
FSX never complained about those 485 traffic files before!


- Edit²:
The plot thickens. I could isolate a faulty traffic file. However, recompilation doesn't work. Hm².
 
I think this is worth a seperate post.

I could solve the problem. I just compiled the flight plan again in a virtual XP32 environment and everything appears to be working now. No OOM upon starting whatsoever.

Totally whack...
 
Ive got the same problems i keep getting run out of available memory , it says to adjust my scenery, terrain or traffic.

Ime at a loss.
Ime using ultimate traffic and have got rid of the GA traffic and cut down airliner traffic by half.

My Mesh complexity is set to 51
Mesh resolution is set to 10m
texture resolution set to 5M
level of detail redius is set to medium.

Scenery settings are on normal complexity and density.
If I have to turn this stuff down I'me sure FS9 would look better.
I don't get it on a short flight only longer flights

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

System specs:
Alienware Area 51:
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6700 @ 2.66GHz
4Gb Ram
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
 
My physical memory usage is through the roof, any ideas what would cause this?
 
I found this usefull info.

On 32-bit platforms, applications are generally limited under a 2 GB boundary as the maximum size of the virtual address space. In this context, the “out of memory” errors in Windows Vista are generated by applications that have eaten up all the virtual address space allocated to them.

“Every memory allocation, file mapping, or library that is loaded by an application consumes space in this virtual address space. When the application consumes all its virtual address space, any additional such operations fail. Although all applications should be coded to handle memory allocation failures, many applications do not recover correctly from such failures. Therefore, the programs may become unstable or stop responding after they recover from such failures”, Microsoft informed.

The Redmond company directly tied the “out of memory” errors with the practice built into some applications to construct a copy of the video memory resources in virtual memory. In this regard, 32-bit systems with large amounts of video memory are particularly susceptible to the exhaustion of virtual memory, simply because of the large volume of virtual address space reserved for performing an in-memory copy of the video resources.

“To address this problem, Microsoft is changing the way that the video memory manager
maintains the content of video memory resources. This change is being made so that a permanent virtual address range does not have to be used for each virtualized allocation. With the new approach, only allocations that are created as “lockable” consume space in the virtual address space of the application. Allocations that are not created as “lockable” do not consume space. This approach significantly reduces the virtual address space that is used. Therefore, the application can run on large video memory configurations without reaching the limits,” Microsoft added.

The Redmond company, however, underscored the fact that while the move introduces a fix for excessive virtual address consumption, the solution is only temporary, as the immutable 2 GB limit will become insufficient as applications evolve. This is why Microsoft now delivers two updates designed to resolve Graphics Virtual Address issues on Windows Vista. You will be able to download the patches for 32-bit Vista from here, and for 64-Vista from here.
Click to expand...
 
Sean Doran said:
My physical memory usage is through the roof, any ideas what would cause this?
Click to expand...


Seems odd Sean. I assume you are using Vista?

First thing that sticks out to me is you show that your computer has 4GB of RAM, but the Task Manager only shows a total of approx. 2.6GB physical RAM installed.

I thought Vista could automatically see 4GB without the 'switch' being used, as I do for XP?

IIRC, I typically see 1.5-1.7GB used when I run FSX out of the 3.15+/- XP can take advantage of out of the 4GB I have installed. In other words, I almost always have more than 1GB 'overhead'.
 
Shouldn't Vista, even the 32bit version, see all 4GB of RAM?

(This is probably separate from you usage issue)
 
Vista 32 bit will not see 4 GB of memory. Your Bios might see it but the OS will not. The inability for the OS to address more than 3GB of ram is a 32bit addressing system limitation. If you want to utilize 4 GB you need to use a 64 bit OS.
Sean, does this happen with any other game/sim? If it only happens with fsx, did it do it before you installed the AI traffic programs? Maybe uninstall them and try fsx with out and see if it still happens.

Joe
 
Then why would they sell it with a 32 bit system makes no sense to me, all this computer crap is really starting to piss me off.

It does not happen with any other games, I can run all the newest games maxed out with no issues.

Ill take out UT and see if it helps . Thanks

To make matters worse I cant download a fix from MS website, Hell i cant download anything from it anymore for some reason. They make things so damn difficult.
 
Ive taken out ultimate traffic, CPU usage is now 55% to 70% and physical memory has dropped to the 70's.
 
Sean Doran said:
Then why would they sell it with a 32 bit system makes no sense to me, all this computer crap is really starting to piss me off.

It does not happen with any other games, I can run all the newest games maxed out with no issues.

Ill take out UT and see if it helps . Thanks

To make matters worse I cant download a fix from MS website, Hell i cant download anything from it anymore for some reason. They make things so damn difficult.
Click to expand...

It might be you already have the fix installed. You can check to see if you have the fix by going into Windows update and checking the update log and look for the KB number with the one at the MS site.

Joe
 
Sean

I was staying out of this thread because you guys were making some really interesting discoveries and points of info.

Then you mentioned UT. I'm assuming your talking UTX and if so, this one program is always 1/2 of the equation of every OOM message that I get.

It started out that anytime I tried to run UTX-Europe and a complex aircraft I would at some point be 100% guaranteed of an OOM.

At that time the original UTX-USA and the same complex aircraft created no issues at all. Then when they upgraded UTX-USA (V2 or V3?) to do something fancy that UTX-Europe was doing, I started getting the OOMs over the US also.

So far the aircraft that I can bet on getting an OOM when running UTX scenery are the CoolSky MD-80, CS C-130X and now the A2A B377.

I was given the advice early on about the boot/ini switch trick, but that doesn't work for me. I think it's because I usually have several things open and running while I'm flying. To me it looks like the boot.ini switch throws so much memory resource in FSX's direction that it causes other problems and CTDs when I try to do anything but just fly.

As a good example... I just did a complete reformat of my system and have a super clean well layered version of FSX/Accelleration installed at the moment. I have almost every scenery and custom add-on program I have for FSX installed and running. The only thing not installed at the moment is UTX. I've spent the last few months flying the B377 everyday for many hours all over the US and Europe and haven't had a single OOM.

So on my end... No UTX + B377,MD-80 or C-130 = No OOM.

No other aircraft I have in combo with the UTXs causes the OOM problem.
 
FAC257 said:
Sean

I was staying out of this thread because you guys were making some really interesting discoveries and points of info.

Then you mentioned UT. I'm assuming your talking UTX and if so, this one program is always 1/2 of the equation of every OOM message that I get.

It started out that anytime I tried to run UTX-Europe and a complex aircraft I would at some point be 100% guaranteed of an OOM.

At that time the original UTX-USA and the same complex aircraft created no issues at all. Then when they upgraded UTX-USA (V2 or V3?) to do something fancy that UTX-Europe was doing, I started getting the OOMs over the US also.

So far the aircraft that I can bet on getting an OOM when running UTX scenery are the CoolSky MD-80, CS C-130X and now the A2A B377.

I was given the advice early on about the boot/ini switch trick, but that doesn't work for me. I think it's because I usually have several things open and running while I'm flying. To me it looks like the boot.ini switch throws so much memory resource in FSX's direction that it causes other problems and CTDs when I try to do anything but just fly.

As a good example... I just did a complete reformat of my system and have a super clean well layered version of FSX/Accelleration installed at the moment. I have almost every scenery and custom add-on program I have for FSX installed and running. The only thing not installed at the moment is UTX. I've spent the last few months flying the B377 everyday for many hours all over the US and Europe and haven't had a single OOM.

So on my end... No UTX + B377,MD-80 or C-130 = No OOM.

No other aircraft I have in combo with the UTXs causes the OOM problem.
Click to expand...
I think they are talking about the other UTX, Ultimate Traffic. Darn you similarly-named products!
 
The true test will be tonight when I get this baby on a 13 hour journey we will she how she responds.:ernae:
 
Sean, you could try this:

Enter this into the "Run" dialogue (Start -> "Run" -> Right click "Run as Administrator"):
bcdedit /set IncreaseUserVA 3072

This does effectively allocate a bit more space of the Ram for programs.

I've used a similar switch (/3GB /userva=2560 in the boot.ini) on XP32 and it cured any OOMs, even with "only" 2GB Ram.
However, I can't say how it may work out on Vista 32 and with 4Gb Ram.

Best would be searching the internet for more info about Vista32 and 4Gb in the combination with the userva tweak.
 
Butcherbird17 said:
Bjoern, There is no boot.ini in vista, so the switch will not work. As you posted it will work in XP.
Click to expand...

You didn't read my post thoroughly. ;)

I never said that the boot.ini tweak will also work in Vista; that's why I posted the bcdedit line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top