Re: memory exhaustive error

[Laurent Hoeltgen]

On 08/16/2012 07:28 AM, Martin Helm wrote:
> Am 16.08.2012 07:11, schrieb tharaka weheragoda:
>> Hi Martin,
>> 
>> I found some valuable information in this link.But i dont know
>> how to run thjis configure command because i can't found out any
>> file called configure.Can you please help me to do it ?
>> 
>> Thanks in advance, Tharaka 
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/doc/interpreter/Compiling-Octave-with-64_002dbit-Indexing.html
>>
>>
>> 
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:17 AM, tharaka weheragoda
>> <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> How can i upgrade into a latest version.is <http://version.is> 
>> there a command?
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Martin Helm <address@hidden 
>> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>> 
>> Am 16.08.2012 06:25, schrieb tharaka weheragoda:
>>> Hi martin, my octave version is 3.2.4. I have 6GB RAM. So how
>>> can i run
>> out of
>>> memory? Without upgrading isn't there any other solution ?
>>> 
>>> Thanks & regards, Tharaka
>>> 
>> Please keep the list on cc.
>> 
>> I am afraid you have to choose between updating octave and 
>> rebuilding your current version from source with enable-64bit ,
>> but before you go for one of that wait if other people on the
>> list can give you a better advise.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> Again please keep the list on cc.
> 
> No it is not just running a configure command and the rest solves
> itself by black magic. First of all you obviously have no sources
> but only a binary octave install and second you also need to
> recompile a bunch of libraries which are not part of octave to get
> full 64 bit indexing. I just want to make you are aware that I do
> not need that, double arrays with 16 GB max size are large enough
> for my needs, so I do not compile myself with --enable-64.
> 
> _______________________________________________ Help-octave mailing
> list address@hidden 
> https://mailman.cae.wisc.edu/listinfo/help-octave
> 

Hi,

Unless you really need a full matrix of that size (which I doubt), I
would suggest to try it with sparse matrices. On my Debian Box with
octave 3.2.4, I get the following:

ones(25000,25000) -> fails, out of memory (as expected)
sparse(25000,25000) -> works like a charm.

so, if you have to deal with large matrices that only contain few
non-zero entries, use the sparse matrix type. It avoids all the hassle
of compiling octave with 64bit indexing.

Regards,
Laurent