Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size 
Author Message
 Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size

This one is a long one, so hold on.  I upgraded from Clipper 5.2 to
5.3 and from Blinker 3.0 to 4.1.  Under the 5.2/3.0 combination my EXE
was 609k, but under 5.3/4.1 EXE is 693k.  As far as i can see, the
program still functions as normal, except when I try to reindex my
tables. I am using DBFCDX and I have 17 tables and most are small
except for 3 of them.  When I try to run the module that reindexes the
tables (delete CDX files, then USE, INDEX ON and TAG) I either lock
up, bump out with no message or get "VM exhausted".  I have trimmed
down the application quite a bit (was 723k under new combination), but
now I need to add some code for my new project.  I ripped out the code
to reindex the tables and ran as a seperate application to make sure
that there was nothing wrong with the indexing itself and ran
correctly.  So, it looks like a memory issue.  Any suggestions on how
to get reindexing back into main program under new combination?

Mike
Don't Worry, Be Happy!



Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size

Is there anything that would prevent you from switching from real to
extended linking?
--
Richard Mitchell
http://www.geocities.com/~bytemaster
bytemaster at ibm.net



t>...

Quote:
> This one is a long one, so hold on.  I upgraded from Clipper 5.2 to
> 5.3 and from Blinker 3.0 to 4.1.  Under the 5.2/3.0 combination my EXE
> was 609k, but under 5.3/4.1 EXE is 693k.  As far as i can see, the
> program still functions as normal, except when I try to reindex my
> tables. I am using DBFCDX and I have 17 tables and most are small
> except for 3 of them.  When I try to run the module that reindexes the
> tables (delete CDX files, then USE, INDEX ON and TAG) I either lock
> up, bump out with no message or get "VM exhausted".  I have trimmed
> down the application quite a bit (was 723k under new combination), but
> now I need to add some code for my new project.  I ripped out the code
> to reindex the tables and ran as a seperate application to make sure
> that there was nothing wrong with the indexing itself and ran
> correctly.  So, it looks like a memory issue.  Any suggestions on how
> to get reindexing back into main program under new combination?

> Mike
> Don't Worry, Be Happy!



Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size

I believe I am using extended, but maybe I think I am but actually
not.  I use BLINKER EXECUTABLE EXTENDED, BLINKER CACHE XMS and EMS.
Is this taking advanted of extended?

Mike


Quote:
>Is there anything that would prevent you from switching from real to
>extended linking?
>--
>Richard Mitchell
>http://www.geocities.com/~bytemaster
>bytemaster at ibm.net



>t>...
>> This one is a long one, so hold on.  I upgraded from Clipper 5.2 to
>> 5.3 and from Blinker 3.0 to 4.1.  Under the 5.2/3.0 combination my EXE
>> was 609k, but under 5.3/4.1 EXE is 693k.  As far as i can see, the
>> program still functions as normal, except when I try to reindex my
>> tables. I am using DBFCDX and I have 17 tables and most are small
>> except for 3 of them.  When I try to run the module that reindexes the
>> tables (delete CDX files, then USE, INDEX ON and TAG) I either lock
>> up, bump out with no message or get "VM exhausted".  I have trimmed
>> down the application quite a bit (was 723k under new combination), but
>> now I need to add some code for my new project.  I ripped out the code
>> to reindex the tables and ran as a seperate application to make sure
>> that there was nothing wrong with the indexing itself and ran
>> correctly.  So, it looks like a memory issue.  Any suggestions on how
>> to get reindexing back into main program under new combination?

>> Mike
>> Don't Worry, Be Happy!

Don't Worry, Be Happy!


Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size

When I use BLINKER EXECUTABLE EXTENDED and i try to run application, I
get a core dump. XMS and EMS cause no problems.

Mike

Quote:

>I believe I am using extended, but maybe I think I am but actually
>not.  I use BLINKER EXECUTABLE EXTENDED, BLINKER CACHE XMS and EMS.
>Is this taking advanted of extended?

>Mike


>>Is there anything that would prevent you from switching from real to
>>extended linking?
>>--
>>Richard Mitchell
>>http://www.geocities.com/~bytemaster
>>bytemaster at ibm.net



>>t>...
>>> This one is a long one, so hold on.  I upgraded from Clipper 5.2 to
>>> 5.3 and from Blinker 3.0 to 4.1.  Under the 5.2/3.0 combination my EXE
>>> was 609k, but under 5.3/4.1 EXE is 693k.  As far as i can see, the
>>> program still functions as normal, except when I try to reindex my
>>> tables. I am using DBFCDX and I have 17 tables and most are small
>>> except for 3 of them.  When I try to run the module that reindexes the
>>> tables (delete CDX files, then USE, INDEX ON and TAG) I either lock
>>> up, bump out with no message or get "VM exhausted".  I have trimmed
>>> down the application quite a bit (was 723k under new combination), but
>>> now I need to add some code for my new project.  I ripped out the code
>>> to reindex the tables and ran as a seperate application to make sure
>>> that there was nothing wrong with the indexing itself and ran
>>> correctly.  So, it looks like a memory issue.  Any suggestions on how
>>> to get reindexing back into main program under new combination?

>>> Mike
>>> Don't Worry, Be Happy!

>Don't Worry, Be Happy!

Don't Worry, Be Happy!


Fri, 08 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Upgrade Causes Increase EXE Size

        Do you have BLINKER INCREMENTAL OFF in your link script??  That will cut
down on .EXE size.  But the .EXE size has little to do with the load size.
I'd continue to work with extended mode linking, and make your the user
computer is set up to run it.  If the user is running Windows '95, make
sure that you have
        DEVICE = C:\WINDOWS\HIMEM.SYS
        DEVICE = C:\WINDOWS\EMM386.EXE NOEMS
in the config.sys file.  Otherwise, your DOS programs may not run
correctly.
        You may also need  FILES= and BUFFERS =  statements in config.sys, but it
doesn't seem like you're running out of file handles since that generates
its own error message.
        if the NOEMS option for EMM386 doesn't work, try using RAM instead.  I've
been blasted for using the RAM option, but I have two programs that need it
or else they crash!
Paul Van House



t>...

Quote:
> I believe I am using extended, but maybe I think I am but actually
> not.  I use BLINKER EXECUTABLE EXTENDED, BLINKER CACHE XMS and EMS.
> Is this taking advanted of extended?



Fri, 08 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Problem: Reducing/increasing SMARTDRV.EXE cache size (like Windows does it)

2. How to: increase stack size in Turbo Prolog .EXE

3. MS 5.1 .exe is causing GPF in user.exe

4. Dramatic increase of invalid window handles with 313 upgrade

5. Blobs - file size increase

6. Help - is there any way of increasing the stack size in Smalltalk

7. Dynamically increasing string size

8. Size increase under C5.5b?

9. increasing the size of a field...

10. How do I increase the point size in XY plots

11. How to increase the internal table size in YACC (Sparcworks 3.1)

12. increased code size with order dependent blocking assignments

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software