Estimado Koldo,
Me alegro de conocer tu inter�s.
Dame un tel�fono de contacto y te llamaremos para que puedas participar en una entrevista de grupo � individual con la empresa consultora para que puedas opinar y colaborar.
Un saludo
Jose Ignacio Pijo�n Zubizarreta
Jefe de Secci�n-Unidad de Investigaci�n-Hospital de Cruces
Unidad de Epidemiolog�a Cl�nica
Tfno: 946006452
Fax: 946006451
correo electr�nico: [email protected]
-----Mensaje original-----
De: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] En nombre de Sergiy Radyakin
Enviado el: lunes, 07 de abril de 2008 17:29
Para: [email protected]
Asunto: Re: RE: st: Memory Issues
Hello Gabi,
first, I suggest reading this page, which gives some more information about Stata/Windows/Memory:
http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/win/winmemory.html
second, there should be hardly any benefit of "killing" (Unix term) other processes, since they have their own memory space. The only benefit is that there will be more physical memory available, and hence less swapping. What really matters (AFAIK) is the number and kind of libraries that Stata uses. This is something you can't control (unless there will be a console version of Stata for Windows one day - then you could choose between the two versions). One of the frequently mentioned reasons Stata 10 provides less memory space for data (as opposed to Stata 9) is that it uses GDIPLUS.DLL (newer generation graphical subsystem, overriding older GDI (you will see both gdi32.dll and gdiplus.dll in your XP system). I am not sure which particular library differs on Vista from it's counterpart in XP. I suggest you try before you buy.
third, the numbers I mentioned are observational, they are what I observed on other people's computers. It does not mean that it is universally so. There are as many flavours of Vista and XP as there are flavours of Stata, or even more.
fourth, if you think about working with large datasets go for Win64/Stata64. By large I do not mean >2GB, I mean >800MB already, since you will need to create temporary variables, for lot's of different purposes (merging, reshaping, etc). Also, there is probably only a tiny fraction of 32-bit new computers sold now, and the price of Stata does not depend on the bits anymore (I guess earlier there was a nominal $25 additional charge). Observationally, I saw people setting mem to 40G just because they can now (and the machine does not have to have 40G of memory installed).
Hope this helps.
Best regards, Sergiy
On 4/4/08, Gabi Huiber <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sergiy, when you have a minute could you please elaborate on point 4
> of your post?
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Sergiy Radyakin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > 4. From what I know, Vista should do better then XP in giving Stata
> > more memory. A typical limit for Stata 10 would be about 700-800 MB
> > on XP 32-bit, and about 1500MB on Vista 32-bit.
> >
> >
>
> I am asking because I'm running 32-bit XP with 2G of RAM and I keep
> having to kill background processes in order to free up enough
> contiguous memory to set mem in the 900M-1G range when I do need that
> much (it happens on occasion). I stuck with XP when I upgraded my
> computer last year because I kept hearing horror stories about how
> Vista was hungrier than XP, and I figured for my money I'd rather have
> Stata taken care of than watch a prettier GUI. If I'm reading you
> correctly, that was not at all a tradeoff I had to make. Too bad.
>
> Gabi
> *
> * For searches and help try:
> * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
