RAM consumption

[mincharug.shulft]

Hi All,
We are in the process of migrating our TM1-datamodel from TM1 9.0 to TM1 9.5.2 FP2
From TM1 32bit to TM1 64bit (Server OS is already on 64bit with
Win2003).
In taskmanager we can see for datamodel on 32bit:
Mem Usage: 2,4 GB
VM Size: 3,0 GB

On 64bit with 64-bit TM1 for the same datamodel it comes to:
Mem Usage: 3,7 GB
VM Size: 9,8 GB

Is this comprehensible on your end? Is this increase (more than doubled
RAM-consumption) in a normal range?
Or
Re-ordering or configuration change would reduce the RAM-allocation?
If please help us with parameters adding with configuration file.

And what is the difference between Mem Usage and VM Size in the taskmanager?

[qml]

The increase in memory consumption looks pretty normal to me. The biggest part of it would be down to the new 64-bit addressing, which would add in the range of 50% or more. You need to add Unicode storage of the newer version of TM1 to the equation, which means more memory usage by text data, too.

You could probably get some of that RAM back if you optimise your model, but you could do the same thing under 32 bits too.

VM is Virtual Memory, called also a Page File or a Swap File. You can find plenty to read on the subject on the Web.

[David Usherwood]

Is this comprehensible on your end? Is this increase (more than doubled
RAM-consumption) in a normal range?

Yes.

Re-ordering or configuration change would reduce the RAM-allocation?
If please help us with parameters adding with configuration file.

Rightclick on the large cube(s) and use the dimension reordering tool

And what is the difference between Mem Usage and VM Size in the taskmanager?

Mem Usage - in RAM
VM Size - in Ram + swap

Do you have support from a knowledgeable partner? You need it.

[mincharug.shulft]

Hi All,

as its urgent for me.and thanks to all in advance.

datamodel current-TM1 9.0 32bit future-TM1 9.5.2 64bit
Tm1 server Baseload in GB 2.4 9.7
TM1 server Peak in GB 3.95 16.0
(please find the attached)
we are currently in 9.0 version and we are migrated to 952-64 bit and
the RAM allocation is above.

and currently we have 12 GB RAM only.
what is the RAM size would you recommend here?please help me as you all experise and your known....

Thanks.

[jim wood]

I wouldn't just look to upgrade your RAM I would also upgrade your OS. While 2008 R2 is a pain from a security point of view, Microsoft has updated it's server OS's memory management routine with each OS version.

[asutcliffe]

datamodel current-TM1 9.0 32bit future-TM1 9.5.2 64bit
Tm1 server Baseload in GB 2.4 9.7
TM1 server Peak in GB 3.95 16.0
(please find the attached)
we are currently in 9.0 version and we are migrated to 952-64 bit and
the RAM allocation is above.

I'm not sure I follow these figures. Previously you'd quoted approximately a 150% increase in RAM consumption when moving from 32 bit to 64 bit. Now you seem to be saying there's a 400% increase which is higher than I'd expect.

and currently we have 12 GB RAM only.
what is the RAM size would you recommend here?please help me as you all experise and your known....

Thanks.

This really depends on a number of things. Eg, is the volume of data or the complexity of the model going to continue to grow? How much does the your OS support? Are you convinced that it can't be optimised? How is the model used and how does this cause increases in RAM consumption? etc....

Again, I don't quite understand the figures you've provided. If you're saying your model consumes 4gb on a dedicated server with 12gb and you don't expect it to grow much and recycle the service every so often so that garbage doesn't build up too much, then you might not even need any more. If you're saying it consumes 16gb already, then obviously 12gb isn't enough.

I suggest you do some thorough testing to try to work out the maximum amount of RAM your model will consume now under various conditions and how much it will grow with time (if at all). In my experience, if you want IT to give you more RAM, you may need to provide something similar as a business case anyway.

[mincharug.shulft]

Hi asutcliffe ,

Current TM1 90 32-bit was
base load is 2.4 GB and Peak is 3.95 GB
and
For TM1 952 62-bit was
baseload is 9.7 GB
Peak calculated as below
Peak for 952 64-bit =952 64-bit base load/90 32-bit baseload * Peak of current 90 32-bit
=16 GB

for that we have estimated as 16 GB RAM would enough somthing like that.

So what is your recommendation using this calculation.

Thanks.

[asutcliffe]

Hi asutcliffe ,

Current TM1 90 32-bit was
base load is 2.4 GB and Peak is 3.95 GB
and
For TM1 952 62-bit was
baseload is 9.7 GB
Peak calculated as below
Peak for 952 64-bit =952 64-bit base load/90 32-bit baseload * Peak of current 90 32-bit
=16 GB

for that we have estimated as 16 GB RAM would enough somthing like that.

So what is your recommendation using this calculation.

Thanks.

I'm not sure I follow your calculations completely and have no idea how you've determined "baseload" and "peak". However, if you think the largest amount of RAM your model is ever going to consume is 16gb, then obviously your server will need more than 16gb of RAM.

I suggest going back and reviewing your figures and calculation, ensuring that you've understood the distinction between RAM and Virtual Memory. It might also be time to pay someone to look at this for you.

[stephen waters]

Hi All,

as its urgent for me.and thanks to all in advance. ...... and currently we have 12 GB RAM only.

RAM is cheap. If it is urgent why not just get some extra RAM to give you some headroom while you sort out underlying issues? eg 16 Gb RAM module for our Dell server costs $250!

Given the cost of RAM nowadays there is no point in underspecifying when you move to a new server.

[asutcliffe]

RAM is cheap. If it is urgent why not just get some extra RAM to give you some headroom while you sort out underlying issues? eg 16 Gb RAM module for our Dell server costs $250!

Given the cost of RAM nowadays there is no point in underspecifying when you move to a new server.

Good point! That's cheaper than a day of consulting.