Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ratbaggy

Multithreading

Recommended Posts

Running an 8 core Mac Pro with CS4, occassionaly (and I can't work out why) AE - when multithreding - kinda wigs out and leaves AESELFLINKs open. Same thing happens with BGrenderer.

 

So...what have I done wrong? Or is this a known/experienced bug?

 

It seems very random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar problems on my 8 core here – my system hangs a lot when multiprocessing is on and I'm rendering. I'm really finding the whole multiprocessing in AE CS4 buggy as hell.

 

How much much RAM have you got out of curiosity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have got 8Gb... I know, not the best...but.

 

The memory requirements do vary, but here are rough numbers that should be good starting points:

 

For HD, you want at least 2GB for each process; preferably more. You almost always want to leave 1-2GB for other applications. That leads to some relatively simple math. For your system, leaving 2GB for other applications gets you down to 6GB. That's enough RAM for three processes at 2GB each.

 

If you don't set your Minimum Allocation Per CPU high enough, or if you don't set RAM To Leave For Other Applications high enough, then you are going to experience the inevitable problems of multiple components both within and outside of After Effects fighting over memory, which slows things down. One of the things that can really kill your performance is essentially telling After Effects to fire up all eight cores and then starving those cores of RAM---which is what happens is you set your allocations too low and don't have much RAM.

 

For more information, see "Memory & Multiprocessing preferences" and "Improve performance".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have got 8Gb... I know, not the best...but.

Same here, so feel your pain on that one.

 

For HD, you want at least 2GB for each process; preferably more. You almost always want to leave 1-2GB for other applications. That leads to some relatively simple math. For your system, leaving 2GB for other applications gets you down to 6GB. That's enough RAM for three processes at 2GB each.

 

Thanks for this Todd.

 

I've always tried to keep a minimum of 2GB per core but I think the real sweet spot for me was turning up the RAM to 2GB for other applications. Just did a couple of renders then vs 1.5GB for other applications and the render is noticeably faster and the system seems far more stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread spurred me to write this post.

 

 

nice one - makes sense.

 

what we're not covering though is the issue of aeselflinks not shutting down randomly though eh.

 

Though I am working on a theory...could it be at all possible that Quicktime could be causing issues? It might just be a coincedence, but the times I've noticed the references not shutting down, Quicktime has often been open.

Edited by Ratbaggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nice one - makes sense.

 

what we're not covering though is the issue of aeselflinks not shutting down randomly though eh.

 

In my experience, the aeselflinks that failed to shut down were the ones that had been starved of RAM and had gone into their quiescent state (stopped rendering). So, I think that these may be related. If you're still having problems with aeselflink processes not shutting down, and you're using the After Effects CS4 (9.0.2) update, then please file a bug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, no matter how I set up the memory and CPU settings, multiprocessing in AE is a bit sketchy. I'm constantly using the Activity Monitor in OSX to check in on those aeselflinks and kill them and or/ AE when they're flaking out. My current project is a beast of HD and 2K files and at least once a day I have to kill AE so it can compose itself.

 

Not to turn this into a "why isn't this software perfect?" rant, but it seems to me that we should be arriving at a point by now where we don't have to constantly manage After Effects to keep it happy. HD+ resolutions are no longer exotic, yet when I'm working with them, which is 90% of the time, I spend a fair amount of time every day managing After Effects. Even leaving a couple of CPU's and plenty of memory for the rest of the system, often when I'm multiprocessing in AE, I basically can't use the machine at all as everything else moves at a glacial pace. I realize I'm about to make somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison, but I can have Cinema 4D blazing all day long on complex renders where it's showing constant 790% CPU usage on my 8 core system, and I can still use other programs pretty normally and Cinema almost never flakes out on me, and doesn't require me to tell it which resources to use or not. Yes, I realize the differences in the types of processing involved, but I'm not sure having all these different memory and CPU options in AE is feature as much as it's me doing the work that a professional level piece of software should be able to handle on its own. Would it be all that difficult for AE to take a peek at the available resources and configure itself for optimum performance without crippling the system? Maybe; I'm not a programmer, but I'd like to see things go that way.

 

Perhaps the coming 64 bit AE will make much of this a moot point assuming you can afford a boatload of RAM. For now I've upped my workstation standards from "a lot of RAM" to "as much RAM as the system can hold."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, no matter how I set up the memory and CPU settings, multiprocessing in AE is a bit sketchy. I'm constantly using the Activity Monitor in OSX to check in on those aeselflinks and kill them and or/ AE when they're flaking out. My current project is a beast of HD and 2K files and at least once a day I have to kill AE so it can compose itself.

 

Not to turn this into a "why isn't this software perfect?" rant, but it seems to me that we should be arriving at a point by now where we don't have to constantly manage After Effects to keep it happy. HD+ resolutions are no longer exotic, yet when I'm working with them, which is 90% of the time, I spend a fair amount of time every day managing After Effects. Even leaving a couple of CPU's and plenty of memory for the rest of the system, often when I'm multiprocessing in AE, I basically can't use the machine at all as everything else moves at a glacial pace. I realize I'm about to make somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison, but I can have Cinema 4D blazing all day long on complex renders where it's showing constant 790% CPU usage on my 8 core system, and I can still use other programs pretty normally and Cinema almost never flakes out on me, and doesn't require me to tell it which resources to use or not. Yes, I realize the differences in the types of processing involved, but I'm not sure having all these different memory and CPU options in AE is feature as much as it's me doing the work that a professional level piece of software should be able to handle on its own. Would it be all that difficult for AE to take a peek at the available resources and configure itself for optimum performance without crippling the system? Maybe; I'm not a programmer, but I'd like to see things go that way.

 

Perhaps the coming 64 bit AE will make much of this a moot point assuming you can afford a boatload of RAM. For now I've upped my workstation standards from "a lot of RAM" to "as much RAM as the system can hold."

 

 

16Gb more RAM is on the way, so we'll see what difference that makes

Edited by Ratbaggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16Gb more RAM is on the way, so we'll see what difference that makes

 

 

 

Urrrgh ok maybe someone here can shed a light.

 

So I bought this ram, and added it to the system. turns out the differences are that the new modules are x4(dual-rank) and the modules from Apple are x8(single-rank).

 

Why-o-why is this so difficult? SO now I either have to spend more money to get me back up to the amount of RAM I thought I was going to get (get more dual-rank modules) or spend more money on getting the more expensive single-rank modules - they're about double. In my mind, cost is pretty important (bang for buck), but I don't understand tech stuff in great detail.

 

so...is there any reason the single-rank would be the way to go? re-sellability? stability? speed? etc etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...