Re: size of variable

Thanks for your suggestions. you are right about the memory problem. I
also had the memory problem before. I believe the new version of NCL will
be great help with respect to memory issue. I have already installed
latest version of NCL according to Dennis advice. I will run the script
soon. Hopefully it will solve my problem.

With regards

Debasish
.
> Hi Debasish
>
> Everybody faces the same problem, computer memory is always
> much smaller than disk space.
>
> Read what Dennis Shea said about NCL 6.0.0.
> You may want do install it, if you have an older version.
> The older versions aren't able to
> store in the computer memory variables larger than 2GB,
> even if your computer is 64-bit.
> With 6.0.0 the sky is the limit, you can have variables
> as large as your available memory, if your machine is 64-bit.
> (But sill have the 2GB limitation if the computer is 32-bit.)
>
> I hope this helps,
> Gus Correa
>
> Debasish wrote:
>> Thanks Gus for your response.
>> I am agree with you about dividing the large data into small parts
>> which was my last option. I guess now this is my only option
>>
>> Debasish
>>
>> On 2011-06-08, at 16:09, Gus Correa wrote:
>>
>>> Debasish wrote:
>>>> Dear NCL Users,
>>>>
>>>> I am trying to declare a variable: x=new((/34,12784,130,193/), float,
>>>> -999);
>>>> I got following error: fatal:New: requested size of variable
>>>> (43622076160 bytes) exceeds the current maximum allowed on this
>>>> system.
>>>> I realized that the error comes from large dimension of the variable.
>>>> Is there anyway in NCL to handle this type of large dimensional
>>>> variable.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Debasish
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ncl-talk mailing list
>>>> List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
>>>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
>>> Hi Debasish
>>>
>>> The variable seems to require (at least) 43.6GB of memory.
>>> Does your computer have this much? (and some more for the OS, NCL, etc)
>>> Also, if your computer is 32-bit, you probably will have trouble with
>>> variables larger than 2GB, maybe 4GB, anyway.
>>>
>>> Sometimes it is hard to store in memory all data that
>>> we have stored in large disk files.
>>>
>>> Can't you work with parts of the variable at a time?
>>> Say, time slices, or a chunk of a few levels, do whatever data
>>> reduction
>>> you need to do, then accumulate the reduced results in another
>>> (smaller)
>>> variable?
>>>
>>> My two cents,
>>> Gus Correa
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ncl-talk mailing list
>>> List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
>>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ncl-talk mailing list
> List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
>

_______________________________________________
ncl-talk mailing list
List instructions, subscriber options, unsubscribe:
http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/ncl-talk
Received on Wed Jun 8 21:44:27 2011