From the "whatever it's worth department..."

 

Prior to using the "MS Fix" cited above, Max9 has been struggling not to crap out on me with OOM errors. Since running the "fix file" though, I've actually had two instances of Max9 running simultaneously, along with Photoshop CS8, my email client, Windows Explorer, and IE8, plus whatever other services were loaded at boot time...

 

...without a single error occurring! :dirol:

 

That is so good to hear. and I am so excited.

 

I had quit simming because my Core 2 Duo couldn't handle FSX and then after 3 years, with the new IB build I was happy to be back until I started getting this OOM.

 

So.. I am glad to get rid of OOM ....

 

Manny

Learn about "desktop heaps": http://blogs.technet...s-stations.aspx

Seems to me that changing this limits could actually hinder FSX performance, and this is why:

 

Raising the size of the desktop heap, which is used exclusively for Windows OS API (application programming interface, e.g. open a new window) stuff, actually steals precious 32 bit VM address space from FSX such that FSX now has less VM available to store its program specific stuff (which ironically increases the chances of OOM erros in some situations).

 

The above could be based on a wrong assumption on how the desktop heap is seen from the application (so forget what I wrote :blush:) ..but anyways I stand by the following. Now if bumping up these desktop heap sizes solves your specific OOM problem then its a good thing, otherwise leaving them alone is probably best...no FSX performance increase is to be had by messing with these sizes.

Heh, I just wanted to reply as I saw you striked it through.

Having read part of that text and gave up after a while due to my non-technical understanding of windows memory management, my question is only one: why would MS put this as a fix up if it would hurt performance? The real question is does it really hurt performance, at all??

I applied this fix and did a flight between KPHX & KLAX in the NGX with REX E. On approach into KLAX I ran into the OOM warning sound. Just before I turned base leg for 6L FSX crashed and reason was OOM. I might take the time to re-install FSX it's been about a year.

 

I am guessing the systems needs a cleaning and fresh install. Oh well hopefully someone comes up with a new simulator to replace FSX.

Upping these limits will not hinder FSX performance, nor will it increase performance. It only decreases the likelyhood of Windows OS API stuff from running out of memory and causing an OOM. Most likely Windows manages these individual "desktop heaps" in its own VM space rather than the application's VM space. If you open lots of views in FSX, upping these limits could actually help but only in the case where opening a new view causes an OOM.

An OOM is not only caused by opening new views... it is also caused by simple high memory usage through scenery, LOD 6.5, high res aircraft textures and the terminally flying through such area.

Is there a known downside to that fix?

 

Just asking stupid because it's not there by design or comes via the Windows Update feature.

All I can say is I don't understand a lot about the technical discussion being presented but I did install the fix two days ago and before the installation I would usually get at least one or more OOMs during the day flying FSX. So far I have not received one OOM message. I have also not noticed any change in performance.

 

Thanks, Omni

Are you guys applying the fix manually or letting the it do it automatically? I have W7 64x.

I installed it via the hotfix auto installer. From what I can see all it did was change the value:

 

SharedSection=1024,20480,512

 

to

 

SharedSection=1024,20480,1024

 

I am also on W7 64bit

Funny. My previous setting was 768, and not 512. And I looked on the net, they say that W7 X64 default is 768. Why you had 512 as default beats me...

Cool. DirectX Runtime updates are not on Windows Update either, but you still need them.

 

I checked my system and it already had the fix. Maybe that is why I have never had a OOM or CTD on my three computers.

 

At first glsnce, it appears to be a better solution for OOM's on 32 bit systems than the /3g switch. The magic appears to be it allows Windows to close some operations and give FSX more headroom. I don't have any computers with 32 bit Windows to test it.

 

Word Not Allowed, maybe you should add this procedure to your guide. It seems to have helped some people here and might help others in the future. Shouldn't hurt if it's a Microsoft validated fix.

 

I think 512 is default for 32 bit Windows.

 

Dave

My previous setting was 768, and not 512

 

Same here with W7 64x prior to the fix.

I guess I need to try this. I have frequent OOM errors in very dense scenery areas in DX9 mode, although this does not seem to happen in DX10 Preview mode. Is there any reason why that would be the case?

I think DX10 Preview mode possibly has better memory management or better programming, Christopher. Over the last three weeks of DX10 flying, experimenting with dozens of different load combinations, aircraft, scenery, airports, weather, AI - my machine has got nowhere near the usage that the same settings in DX9 would create.

 

Regarding the stack limits - I checked mine, win7-64, and it was the same as Al Stiffs: 1024,20480,512, so I manually changed it to 1024,20480,1024.