Is there a maximum data size for groups?

[Richmond Mathewson]

  On 17/04/2010 18:17, Andre Garzia wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> I have no clue there but I think if you host 400mb worth of images in a
> stack, then you will take a chunk equal to that of RAM for your app to run
> even with virtual memory this is a big requirement and if you want to copy
> this group around, then your requirement will scale. It might be wiser to
> host this images on this and just reference them, which might have the nice
> side effect of allowing smooth group copying.
>
> Then again, I don't know your software or your software needs so this
> commentary might be just ridiculous and wrong.
>
I while back I made a stack that was 500 MB and tried to build a standalone
from it on a G4 'ET' iMac with 256 MB RAM . . . being a bit slow on the 
uptake
it took me about a week to work out that:

1. RunRev (2.0.1) couldn't cope because it had to load all that 500 MB into
     256 MB RAM and whatever Virtual Memory Mac OS X 10.1 was splurging
     over the boot disk (which was also very nearly full of files.

2. That the 'clever' thing to do was to chop up the single stack into about
      200 substacks that opened on top of the main stack so that 
end-users were
     unaware that more than one stack was being used.

     The main stack popped the substacks into RAM when it opened them and
     cleared out the RAM when they closed again; so as there were never 
more than
     about 3 substacks open at anyone time, the RAM overhead was 
significantly
     reduced.

Having rewritten the 'thing'/beast it compiled as a standalone lickety-split
and managed to run reasonably well on computers with128 MB RAM.