Mailing Lists: Apple Mailing Lists
Image of Mac OS face in stamp
 
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple Undo devours RAM

You are aware that Mac OS X uses virtual memory, right? So the difference between systematically going to the disk for storing undoable objects and storing them in RAM and having the system page the ram to the disk would probably be minimil from a performance standpoint.

Have you tried an alternative scheme like compressing the data stored on the Undo stack?

Florent

On 28 janv. 04, at 16:05, Erez Anzel wrote:

UNDO STACK ON DISK: Instead of my large Undo stack entries going into RAM, and then into virtual memory (i.e. disk) when RAM gets tight, I propose the opposite as an option. I realize that this is complicated by the fact that dumping items to a file means that pointers have to be converted into something useful when the information is retrieved. Assuming that the user does not Undo nearly as often as they perform other tasks, I'd say that it's better to use RAM for more common tasks, and write my Undo and Redo stacks directly to disk. The stacks could easily grow to hundreds of megabytes. I'd love to see this as an option in Cocoa; I'm not suggesting that I write it myself.

--
Florent Pillet, Code Segment email@hidden
Developer tools and end-user products for Palm OS & Mac OS X
ICQ: 117292463 http://perso.wanadoo.fr/fpillet
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
References: 
 >Multiple Undo devours RAM (From: Erez Anzel <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Multiple Undo devours RAM (From: Public Look <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Multiple Undo devours RAM (From: Erez Anzel <email@hidden>)



Visit the Apple Store online or at retail locations.
1-800-MY-APPLE

Contact Apple | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2007 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.