2.2: Exporting photos taking all my RAM!

[tryg_daddy]

I used to be able to work on other things while exporting before 2.2, but now I have to wait until lightroom 2.2 finishes an export. RAM usage peaks when completion of export reaches 5'%, and if I try to do anything else, the system is very slow.
This is a new problem.

AMD 2.5 Quad
6 GB Ram
Vista 63

 

[kwdaves]

There is a known problem with how LR2.2 uses memory. Believe it or not, you are relatively lucky. People with 32 bit versions of Windows and with less RAM on Vista 64 bit are seeing crashes.

 

[tryg_daddy]

So there's no fix as of now?

 

[Victoria Bampton]

We're still waiting to hear tryg_daddy, but you could reinstall 2.1 if it's causing you a problem. We're not quite sure how widespread an issue it is yet, as some people aren't noticing it at all. Stick around and we'll keep you posted - and in the meantime, welcome to the forum!

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Welcome from the Sunny South Pacific as well.
If you are using Vista 64bit you may want to try the 32bit version of LR and see if that helps. We are trying to isolate what is happening. Thanks.

 

[kwdaves]

No, no, no. I understand it helps Macs, but the 32bit version on 64 bit Windows can access only 4GB of RAM and will likely make the problems appear sooner.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

I have reports of it working well for Windows, could you give it a whirl please and confirm.

 

[billg71]

I'm typing this while 2.2 is exporting 67 photos, Task Manager reports memory usage holding steady at around 2.75-3G out of 8 available. LR, Firefox, Thunderbird, iTunes, Explorer and CS4 all open. System specs in my siggie.

All done, no problems.........

I don't usually post things like this, I'm sure there's nothing more infuriating to someone who has a problem to read a post about "Well, it works fine for me....",(silently implying that the OP barely has enough intelligence to support respiration and shouldn't be trusted with anything more complicated that a calculator from the Dollar Store). I just want to offer some encouragement that the program actually can and will work properly and hope you find the solution for your machine.

I've been playing with computers since the old days of the Trash-8' and, frankly, what surprises me is not that they have problems but that the damned things manage to work at all, much less as well as they do. When you consider the fact that the average computer has about a kazillion lines of code running all the time, written by Lord-only-knows-how-many developers who have no idea what any of the others are doing, trying to communicate with another kazillion different brands of hardware there are bound to be some conflicts along the way.

But with a little time and effort, most of the time things can be made right. The most important thing is to take small steps, changing only one thing at a time and backing up along the way. Taking the time to update drivers is a must and don't rely on Windows/Microsoft Update to do this. Especially if you've got a relatively new system, driver updates are common and it takes a while to get them through MS's Certified Driver program. Manufacturers push motherboards and video cards into production when the newest chipsets come out and driver QC comes in dead last in the race to put a product on the store shelves. Registry cleaning is something you should do regularly, especially if you install/remove programs frequently. Defragging is also another maintenance task that should be scheduled frequently.

I'll give this to Apple(just to save Geoff some typing ), by limiting access to their hardware they've eliminated a lot of these problems we Windoze users have come to know and hate. But getting a Windoze box to behave isn't rocket science, it just takes a little effort to learn what to do and then a little time to do it regularly.

Bill

P.S. If all else fails, you can always do what any software TS rep will tell you is the first step: "Format your hard drive, re-install the OS and all your programs and email us if it still doesn't work". :x

 

[kwdaves]

Bill,
how much RAM was the "lightroom.exe" process using?

I trick reported on the Adobe Lightroom forum was to try minimizing and then maximizing Lightroom. I tried it twice and I saw the RAM usage in lightroom.exe drop from 1GB+ to under 5''MB.

 

[billg71]

Ken,

Somewhere in the 72'-75'Mb range, not much different from idle. Here are a couple of screenshots, first one while exporting, second at idle:

Just a coincidence they came out so close, memory usage went up in the high 74''s while exporting, low in the 72''s.

HTH,
Bill

 

[Victoria Bampton]

While we're looking at tips and workarounds, small exports seem better than large exports (3 x 1'' is better than 1 x 3''), and the adjustment brush does appear to have memory issues right now (not necessarily a leak, but possibly OTT allocation), so avoidance tactics probably aren't a bad idea.

 

[paul_w]

bill, you might want to edit that last post of yours as you've given everyone a free copy of LR by including your serial number.

 

[kwdaves]

I don't know if this will help or not. I installed the latest version of Direct X 9 a few hours before LR2.2 came out. Running LR2.1 I saw (perhaps only thought I saw) a big improvement with the Auto Mask off (no lags) and little to some improvement with the Auto Mask on. The latest version of direct x 9 (direct x 9.25.1476) is dated Dec 5, 2''8.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Thank you Paul, you're more observant than I am!! I've removed the screenshots for Bill, and he can put edited ones back later if he likes.

 

[billg71]

bill, you might want to edit that last post of yours as you've given everyone a free copy of LR by including your serial number.

Thanks for the heads up, I really shouldn't stay up past my bedtime..... :shock:

Thanks, Victoria! I edited and replaced the screenshots.

Bill

 

[daveprice]

Memory leak here too.

Gave up on 2.1 as it was as slow as a dog with three legs. Then decided to give 2.2 a try when it was released.

Installed fine. Quicker on my system but not as fast as 1.4

After an hour's editing it froze and crashed. After another period of editing I tried to export 75 Canon 5D files and it got about 3' out the door and froze with a white screen.

This is just unacceptable really. How many tries do Adobe need. My CS3 runs lightning fast.

Shame that Lightroom has become bloatware to appease the masses. When it was a RAW converter only it was fine!

 

[Victoria Bampton]

It's really frustrating Dave, I know. Many people are really pleased that it's so much quicker on their machines - but unfortunately some are having trouble, and you appear to be one of them!

CS3 - glad to hear it! The code base is a lot older, and they've had a lot of years to work out the bugs (and there's still plenty left!!!). Lightroom attempts to offer a lot of advanced tools, and it doesn't get it right for everyone, and the wide variety of hardware and driver combinations makes it difficult to trace and fix every single one of the bugs. There are no excuses, but there are reasons. It's not called the cutting edge for no reason!

I'm not defending or attacking Adobe as a whole, but the LR engineers are a good bunch, and they're working hard. They just can't keep everyone happy (customers, marketing guys, shareholders...)

 

[paul_w]

You're welcome bill.

Victoria, I only noticed because a similar thing happened on the u2u forum the other day!

 

[Kiwigeoff]

You're welcome bill.

Victoria, I only noticed because a similar thing happened on the u2u forum the other day!

You are game to hang out there!!:lol::lol:

 

[paul_w]

Now, now Geoff, don't be nasty. It gets quite funny sometimes, all that slanging. Pinch of salt and all that stiff upper lip stuff!

 

[billg71]

I just did a little checking after reading something on the U2U forum about the memory thing being worse with files corrected with the adjustment brush, the results were a little surprising.....

At first, I exported a random folder of images that had no local corrections, memory usage went up from idle but not significantly(basically, what I reported in my first post). So I chose a folder with some images that had local corrections in LR, exported all files and memory usage went up and didn't come back down.

Next step was export only the images with local corrections, same result. More memory used, LR wouldn't let go of it when finished with the export.

Closed LR, started it up again and just randomly browsed through folders in the Library. Then exported some files at random, both with and without local corrections. What I found was that every time I opened a new folder or exported images, memory usage went up and never came back down. I started with LR using 16'Mb of memory and finished at over 2Gb. Exporting files caused a spike in usage but, after the export operation, memory usage was still higher than before. The Task Manager graph looked like a stairstep with bumps, usage would come down after an export but not to the level before.

At this point I was tired of fooling around so I quit and can't comment on just how far this would go. I went from a total system memory usage of a little over 2Gb to well over 4Gb before quitting, but that was with LR using 2Gb so I can see how LR could max out a 2Gb or 4Gb machine pretty quickly.

Did a quick check on the notebook, similar results. LR uses memory for an operation and then, instead of using it again, just grabs more for the next operation. This is definitely not a Good Thing! :evil:

If any of you techy folks want a detailed repeat and screenshots to forward on, PM or email me and I'll do it again and take notes.

Desperately Seeking 2.3....

Bill

 

[kwdaves]

I haven't done much exporting Bill, but just scrolling through a group of files causes the memory usage, particularly the Private Memory in the Physical Memory to go up and the amount seems to be related to the Camera MP/Resolution. My files from the 1'MP cameras cause RAM usage to climb about 35MB per image highlighted and those from my 12MP+ cameras go up about 5'-6'MB per image highlighted. Even doing a Reset All for edited images causes RAM usage to go up.

 

[paul_w]

One tip from the u2u regarding this memory leak when exporting images with local adjustments is to minimise the LR window and then maximise it again. I think that's what was said. Something to do with thumbnails and previews if memory serves me right (no pun intended)

 

[daveprice]

Did a quick check on the notebook, similar results. LR uses memory for an operation and then, instead of using it again, just grabs more for the next operation. This is definitely not a Good Thing! :evil:


Bill

That's the problem Bill. It just eats memory the longer you use it. Glad you are seeing it too now - I read your post on page 1 about "making sure you have latest drivers" etc. and sighed heavily :roll:

Since the release of 2.', LR has been completely unusable in a professional workflow for me. 2.1 didn't improve things and now 2.2's interface seems faster it bloats up and slows down during the normal course of operations.

I run CS3, Extensis Portfolio with 5'k image catalogs, and even Blender 3D all perfectly zipping along. ACR in CS3 is rock solid and the sliders are as fast as LR 1.4.

Something sucks in LR 2.' and I'd have thought by the third iteration Adobe would have a grasp on it. Seems not.

 

[sparticat]

Just chiming in- I am seeing the same behavior here on 32 bit Vista with 4GB RAM. Just browsing through a folder which contains photos with adjustment brush edits causes RAM usage to steadily climb. It is never given back to the pool. An export of a folder with photos containing adjustment brush edits causes the problem to occur much more rapidly. Depending on the number of photos in the export it will exhaust all memory and LR hangs with a gray screen and near '% CPU. Reverting to 2.1 solves the issue. 1.4.1 was rock solid on this same machine.