Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => Amiga Software Issues and Discussion => Topic started by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 04:53:07 PM

Title: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 04:53:07 PM
Hi there

This question is related to WB chipram usage and is a bit tricky I think.

I am trying to force my A1200 to use as LITTLE chip ram as possible. I have been able to save a lot of chipmem thanks to the combination of FBlit & WBCtrl in my startup sequence. Browsing large directories with hundreds of icons now eats very little chip memory, which is great!

Now the problem I'm having is that when I browse a large directory set to "View by Name" it eats *MORE* chip ram (a LOT more) than if I view that same directory set to "View by Icon"!!

For example, I have a SCSI harddrive based directory with MANY files in it. If I open and browse that directory when it's set to View by Icon it only eats a few hundred bytes of chip mem. This is ofcourse mainly thanks to FBlit. Yet if I close the window and then set that directory to View by Name using the Window>View by>Name menu option and then reopen the *SAME* dir my chipmem drops by about 80kb !! :-o

So basically, opening directories in "text mode listing" is a LOT less efficient than opening it with resource hungry graphical Icons!! This can't be right and makes no sense to me. Does anyone know what I can do to make text listed directories as effiecient as Icon listed directories??? I don't think I'm being unreasonable to expect text to eat less chipmem than Icons, am I???  :-?

Any ideas, please???  
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: patrik on July 16, 2005, 05:13:59 PM
@dillinger:

Try FText (http://main.aminet.net/util/boot/FText.lha) and see if it makes any difference.


/Patrik
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 05:15:18 PM
Also, are there any other tricks to lower general chipmem usage?? :-D I already know the common stuff like using FBlit, WBCtrl and reducing screen rez/colours ...

Any less common tricks that help?  :-)

thnx
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 05:17:28 PM
@patrik

oooooohh, I've just read some of the FText manual...

"This
    patch causes text to be rendered in fastram instead of chipram for a
    really nice speedup. "

I'll definitely give it a go now!  :-D
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 05:40:37 PM
I just tried FText but it didnt help the situation.
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Merc on July 16, 2005, 05:49:58 PM
I think the problem is that when displaying as text, WB 3.5 and up print the contents of the directory on one big bitmap and display it inside the window.  That's why the scrolling of text mode windows is so smooth compared to WB 3.1 for example.

When you're in icon mode, the icons get drawn out as you scroll I think..  then again, I could be wrong about that, maybe they used one large bitmap for the icon mode as well.

You would think this bitmap would be relocatable to fast RAM by FBlit though, unless there's some kind of a "chip mem only" flag for memory that they've set for those bitmaps.

I guess that doesn't help much, but that's my take on your question anyway :)
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 06:17:37 PM
@merc

Well if you are right, it would explain why text listings are eating so much compared to icons.

Although I have just tried setting FBlit to "exclude" mode...which apparently should promote _every_ process to fastmem and that had no affect. But if your "chipmem ONLY flag" idea is correct then I guess it could override even FBlits exclude mode.

hmmm, strange stuff....
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Framiga on July 16, 2005, 08:21:30 PM
Quote
Now the problem I'm having is that when I browse a large directory set to "View by Name" it eats *MORE* chip ram (a LOT more) than if I view that same directory set to "View by Icon"!!

its a well known issue. There's nothing you can do to fix it.

Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Chain on July 16, 2005, 08:28:06 PM
i think gfx cards have some tool/feature for rendering newicons into fastram. Anyone know about it?
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: dillinger on July 16, 2005, 08:47:25 PM
@Chain

The problem is not with icons. FBlit promotes icons to fastmem perfectly, even on my Classic desktop amy without a gfx-card.

@Framiga

thanks for letting me know. if it's possible, someone should program a patch for the situation immediately...'cause it suxx!  :-(
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: ChaosLord on July 16, 2005, 11:18:22 PM
@dillinger

If u want to view dirs with text listings then u simply MUST
use Directory Opus, or Scalos or any of the million other excellent dir utilities for the Amiga Megacomputer.

Workbench is crap coded.  Sad but true.

Patching bad code is just not the answer to ur troubles my friend.

Use a DirUtil.  You'll thank me later. :-)
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: RWO on July 16, 2005, 11:27:55 PM
@ChaosLord

Quote
Patching bad code is just not the answer to ur troubles my friend.


You got somthing wrong there, you don't fix a problem by patching working code.

If someone wants to fix this annoying chipmem problem he has to patch the problem (proberly in wb library)

RWO
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: kzin on July 17, 2005, 12:54:56 AM
try using Diskmaster its way better than WB, you dont even have to have WB runing.
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Chain on July 17, 2005, 01:10:49 AM
btw its the same situation as with "Windows explorer":)
99.9% people using alternative file manager aka wincmd, totalcmd etc :)
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Animagic on July 17, 2005, 10:25:55 AM
Quote

Chain wrote:
btw its the same situation as with "Windows explorer":)
99.9% people using alternative file manager aka wincmd, totalcmd etc :)


Indeed. I use Directory Opus for PC on my WinXP  :lol:
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Ancalimon on July 28, 2014, 08:30:37 AM
Has there been any modification to AmigaOS3 for this "view by name" uses lots of chipmem problem?
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: itix on July 29, 2014, 09:12:17 AM
Quote from: Ancalimon;769844
Has there been any modification to AmigaOS3 for this "view by name" uses lots of chipmem problem?

I think not. It is not only using trendemous amount chip ram it is also very slow.

The best way to reduce chip mem usage is to use less colours in Workbench. And of course screen size.
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: zipper on July 29, 2014, 09:37:36 AM
What about Wb2Fast hack from OS 3.5 CD?
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Ancalimon on September 18, 2014, 11:34:39 PM
Quote from: itix;769901
I think not. It is not only using trendemous amount chip ram it is also very slow.

The best way to reduce chip mem usage is to use less colours in Workbench. And of course screen size.


I just found out that (probably again :P ) changing icon quality from "poor" to "bad" using Workbench prefs makes view by name use fastmem instead of chipmem.
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: lionstorm on September 19, 2014, 08:19:13 PM
Quote from: Ancalimon;773343
I just found out that (probably again :P ) changing icon quality from "poor" to "bad" using Workbench prefs makes view by name use fastmem instead of chipmem.


so it is faster then ?
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: stefcep2 on September 20, 2014, 01:13:53 AM
try Peter K' icon library:

"This icon.library won't waste ChipMem for any Workbench icons."

http://aminet.net/package/util/libs/IconLib_46.4
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: Oldsmobile_Mike on September 20, 2014, 01:17:34 AM
Quote from: stefcep2;773451
try Peter K' icon library

I was going to suggest the same thing, but I didn't see much point in commenting on a nine year old thread. LOL, oh well! ;)
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: paul1981 on September 25, 2014, 10:10:48 PM
Quote from: stefcep2;773451
try Peter K' icon library:

"This icon.library won't waste ChipMem for any Workbench icons."

http://aminet.net/package/util/libs/IconLib_46.4

Yes but it doesn't solve the issue of the "View By Name" which just eats chip memory like there's no tomorrow, leaving the Workbench with no Chip memory free at all (if there's a large listing)...plain ridiculous if you ask me.

So whichever library is responsible, can we (OS3.0/3.1 users) use loadmodule to use one from OS3.5/3.9 which presumably doesn't have that problem?
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: klx300r on September 26, 2014, 12:35:24 AM
Quote from: Chain;195386
btw its the same situation as with "Windows explorer":)
99.9% people using alternative file manager aka wincmd, totalcmd etc :)


tisk tisk you should only be using THE ONE & ONLY best file manager for our miggies on your Windows machine my friend:)http://www.gpsoft.com.au/
Title: Re: HELP: Lowering WB Chipmem Usage (this one's tricky!!)
Post by: stefcep2 on September 26, 2014, 04:29:26 AM
Quote from: paul1981;773909
Yes but it doesn't solve the issue of the "View By Name" which just eats chip memory like there's no tomorrow, leaving the Workbench with no Chip memory free at all (if there's a large listing)...plain ridiculous if you ask me.

So whichever library is responsible, can we (OS3.0/3.1 users) use loadmodule to use one from OS3.5/3.9 which presumably doesn't have that problem?


Hmmm..never noticed that.

I have ftext and fblit though.  Wonder if thats why?