Author: MB Software Solutions, LLC
Posted: 2012-10-05 09:56:40 Link
VFP9 SP2
Using the tip from Fox.wikis.com, I had this in my code:
SYS(3050, 1, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
SYS(3050, 2, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
The first line seems to run ok, but the 2nd line (for background memory)
fails.
Ideas as to why? This hasn't been a problem with Vista and Windows 7
32-bit boxes. (To be fair, I don't know if this is failing on other
64-bit systems or just this one site.)
tia,
--Mike
--
Mike Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
President, Chief Software Architect
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/506EF528.8060408@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Dave Crozier
Posted: 2012-10-05 10:03:44 Link
Mike,
It simply DOESN'T work on 64 bit. I got bitten with it earlier this year. In fact it totally screws up apps that use a lot of memory and makes them unstable.
I had to take it out of my builds here.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-bounces@mail.leafe.com] On Behalf Of MB Software Solutions, LLC
Sent: 05 October 2012 15:57
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: SYS(3050) error on Win 7, x64 (64-bit) machine
VFP9 SP2
Using the tip from Fox.wikis.com, I had this in my code:
SYS(3050, 1, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0)))) SYS(3050, 2, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
The first line seems to run ok, but the 2nd line (for background memory) fails.
Ideas as to why? This hasn't been a problem with Vista and Windows 7 32-bit boxes. (To be fair, I don't know if this is failing on other 64-bit systems or just this one site.)
tia,
--Mike
--
Mike Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
President, Chief Software Architect
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/BD031ECABF2B60499200AAB3DBB4A999F12761EA@EX-A-FPL.FPL.LOCAL
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Tracy Pearson
Posted: 2012-10-05 10:06:04 Link
MB Software Solutions, LLC wrote on 2012-10-05:
> VFP9 SP2
>
> Using the tip from Fox.wikis.com, I had this in my code:
>
> SYS(3050, 1, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
> SYS(3050, 2, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
>
> The first line seems to run ok, but the 2nd line (for background memory)
> fails.
>
> Ideas as to why? This hasn't been a problem with Vista and Windows 7
> 32-bit boxes. (To be fair, I don't know if this is failing on other
> 64-bit systems or just this one site.)
>
> tia,
> --Mike
Mike,
On my Win7 64bit desktop, I opened vRunFox9 and tried these commands.
Both fail:
---------------------------
Error!
---------------------------
An error has occurred:
Error #11
Function argument value, type, or count is invalid.
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
Seems ?VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0)) returns a negative number.
Tracy Pearson
PowerChurch Software
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/000b01cda30a$f0af1960$d20d4c20$@powerchurch.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Jean MAURICE
Posted: 2012-10-05 10:54:59 Link
On my WIN7-64 system, both commands work !
I have a 'start procedure' that logs what it does:
#DEFINE cst_limite_memoire_foreground 64
#DEFINE cst_limite_memoire_background 48
= FPUTS(m.lnresult, "limitation de la mémoire utilisée"+ CRLF + ;
" initial : foreground : "+ SYS(3050,1)+ CRLF + ;
" background : "+ SYS(3050,2))
= FPUTS(m.lnresult, " maintenant : foreground 64Mo : "+ ;
SYS(3050,1, cst_limite_memoire_foreground * 1024 * 1024))
= FPUTS(m.lnresult, " background 48Mo : "+ ;
SYS(3050,2, cst_limite_memoire_background * 1024 * 1024))
= FPUTS(m.lnresult, "mémoire initiale"+ CRLF + ;
" SYS(1001):"+ SYS(1001)+ CRLF + ;
" SYS(1011):"+ SYS(1011)+ CRLF + ;
" SYS(1016):"+ SYS(1016))
and the result is
limitation de la mémoire utilisée
initial : foreground : 268435456
background : 100663296
maintenant : foreground 64Mo : 67108864
background 48Mo : 50331648
mémoire initiale
SYS(1001):1073741824
SYS(1011):12216
SYS(1016):7243116
Best regards
The Foxil
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/506F02D3.4090603@wanadoo.fr
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Fred Taylor
Posted: 2012-10-05 11:05:02 Link
How much RAM is on the machine? We see a similar issue (negative # for
SYS(3050)) on a Win2008 server with 12GB of RAM.
Fred
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 7:56 AM, MB Software Solutions, LLC <
mbsoftwaresolutions@mbsoftwaresolutions.com> wrote:
> VFP9 SP2
>
> Using the tip from Fox.wikis.com, I had this in my code:
>
> SYS(3050, 1, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
> SYS(3050, 2, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
>
>
> The first line seems to run ok, but the 2nd line (for background memory)
> fails.
>
> Ideas as to why? This hasn't been a problem with Vista and Windows 7
> 32-bit boxes. (To be fair, I don't know if this is failing on other 64-bit
> systems or just this one site.)
>
> tia,
> --Mike
>
> --
> Mike Babcock, MCP
> MB Software Solutions, LLC
> President, Chief Software Architect
> http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
> http://twitter.com/mbabcock16
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
> Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/**listinfo/profox<http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox>
> OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/**
> listinfo/profoxtech <http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech>
> Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/**search/profox<http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox>
> This message: http://leafe.com/archives/**byMID/profox/506EF528.8060408@**
> mbsoftwaresolutions.com<http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/506EF528.8060408@mbsoftwaresolutions.com>
> ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of
> the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement
> is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the
> obvious.
>
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJCBksrgL51wxOAbJKo3_dSP2N=i9W08cF2-dSZrKUkXvy_KxQ@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Dave Crozier
Posted: 2012-10-05 11:18:37 Link
I can't remember exactly but I'm sure it's when your machine has over 3Gb in it (aka 64 Bit) when the commands screw up.
However I've just looked up in my notes and even manually allocation the buffer sizes to say 256Mb makes a 64bit VFP app unstable so my recommendation is to leave it. I'll do some more digging into my notes but I remember having a horrendous time sorting this out when we just went over to 64 bit last year. It seemed to screw up network connections and force timeouts on the lan.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-bounces@mail.leafe.com] On Behalf Of Dave Crozier
Sent: 05 October 2012 16:04
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: RE: SYS(3050) error on Win 7, x64 (64-bit) machine
Mike,
It simply DOESN'T work on 64 bit. I got bitten with it earlier this year. In fact it totally screws up apps that use a lot of memory and makes them unstable.
I had to take it out of my builds here.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-bounces@mail.leafe.com] On Behalf Of MB Software Solutions, LLC
Sent: 05 October 2012 15:57
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: SYS(3050) error on Win 7, x64 (64-bit) machine
VFP9 SP2
Using the tip from Fox.wikis.com, I had this in my code:
SYS(3050, 1, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0)))) SYS(3050, 2, MIN(536870912, VAL(SYS(3050, 1, 0))))
The first line seems to run ok, but the 2nd line (for background memory) fails.
Ideas as to why? This hasn't been a problem with Vista and Windows 7 32-bit boxes. (To be fair, I don't know if this is failing on other 64-bit systems or just this one site.)
tia,
--Mike
--
Mike Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
President, Chief Software Architect
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
[excessive quoting removed by server]
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/BD031ECABF2B60499200AAB3DBB4A999F12762B8@EX-A-FPL.FPL.LOCAL
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Jean MAURICE
Posted: 2012-10-05 11:22:45 Link
4Go on my development machine
The Foxil
Le 05/10/2012 18:05, Fred Taylor a écrit :
> How much RAM is on the machine? We see a similar issue (negative # for
> SYS(3050)) on a Win2008 server with 12GB of RAM.
>
> Fred
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/506F0955.1000704@wanadoo.fr
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Alan Bourke
Posted: 2012-10-05 11:26:34 Link
4GB on this machine, both work.
--
Alan Bourke
alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1349454394.6573.140661136940465.690F6CDA@webmail.messagingengine.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: Tracy Pearson
Posted: 2012-10-05 11:35:18 Link
16GB on this machine, both fail.
Tracy Pearson
PowerChurch Software
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/000c01cda317$67d107e0$377317a0$@powerchurch.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Author: MB Software Solutions, LLC
Posted: 2012-10-05 13:16:52 Link
On 10/5/2012 12:35 PM, Tracy Pearson wrote:
> 16GB on this machine, both fail.
Sounds like the possible magic number is 4GB. Anything beyond that will
seem to fail using this simple study.
--
Mike Babcock, MCP
MB Software Solutions, LLC
President, Chief Software Architect
http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@mail.leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/506F2414.3030704@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.