AE Warning - Disk Cache???

Why does this say my computer does not have enough space? Is AE creating tons of data every time I use it? It requires more than 16GB to just work??? So confused.
I would like to move my Adobe programs to my D: drive but I'm worried this will only create more problems. But still, there's 16GB available on my C: drive and I'm getting a Warning?
I also have a separate hard drive with 236GB available, I'm just not sure how to control the Cache options (and I also don't understand exactly how much DATA that AE is creating when I use it).
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks guys.
AE Warning:
Your disk cache folder is on a drive that does not have enough available space to safely store the full amount specified in your preferences. Please make more space available or go to Media & Disk Cache preferences to change the folder or maximum disk cache size. (I don't understand how AE needs more than 16GB available.)

It's not that the guy was dishonest. You'd expect him to want to sell you more and bigger. In my experience, computer salespeople don't understand the horsepower required to run motion graphics software. I had a quote from a guy on a machine to run AE and C4D with only 4 GB of RAM. I was, like, "Dude, no." (Just kidding; I'm not a surfer, but I did tell them to get stuffed.)
4GB is the bare minimum required to even run AE. 8 GB is the minimum for actually running it with some semblance of pleasantness. I've got 48 GB of RAM in my work machine.
The most you can get for your money is the answer to your question. This event is good viewing: http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/event/index.cfm?event=set_registered&id=2490687&loc=en_us It explains what system resources AE and Premiere use and how they use them. Very useful for building machines. This may also help: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/878520

Similar Messages

  • After Effects CS6 - huge Disk Cache?

    Hello,
    Looked around on various adobe discussions/forums - so far can't find an answer to this.
    I've just upgraded to AEFX CS6. AEFX gave me a warning about insufficient cache size on my drive - upon looking, I've seen my disk cache (users/library/prefs/adobe/after effects) has swollen up to 80 GB for a current project.
    I am also using CS5 for the same project and the cache folder is a measly 4MB.
    Any solutions? Why the difference between CS5 / CS6  in handling cache?
    I suppose I can delete the cached files (via finder) but despite not having access to these files, is there any down side?
    Thanks in advance.
    D

    The cache is "persistent" in CS6, so older cache files are not overwritten as long as they remain valid. And since CS6 tries to cache literally everything, not just the comp you currently work on, it produces a lot more data for pre-comps or layers with effects. If you don't want it to grow that big, simpyl set a smaller size in the prefs or turn off the disk cache entirely.
    Mylenium

  • CS6 Disk Cache reporting as full when it's not

    I put a 120GB Samsung Pro 840 Pro SSD on a Sonnet Tempo Card into my 4,1 Mac Pro to use a AE's Disk Cache, I set the disk cache to 100GB
    Recently AE often reports that there is not enough available space on the drive for the cache when I start it up.  When I look at the drive in the OS, it says there is over 100GB available and the cache folder is 10GB in size.  A previous time the numbers were different but essentially the problem was the same - I should have a lot of free space but AE doesn't see it.
    What the hell is going on?

    That message does not say that the cache is full.
    That message says that there is not enough room to safely store the amount of cache that you have specified.
    So, the cache may only have 20GB in it now, but After Effects is telling you that if it fills to the full 100GB that you have specified, then you're going to run into problems.
    This is meant as a polite forward-looking warning that you have set the total size of the folder too high for the amount of space that you have on your disk.
    You should never fill a disk all the way full. You should always leave some free space. Opinions differ, but 20% is a good conservative amount to leave free.

  • Disk cache

    Just started using AE and need to know why is it every single time I open AE I get a warning that my disk cache is full and I always have to go through the process of emptying it. when I've never even completed one project.
    I understand the RAM part, but I don't understand why it's full all the time, and as soon as I empty the disk cache it's okay, then I'll practice doing a project and usually delete it after I'm done, then when I open AE the next day to start on a new project, it's the same thing every time.  Empty the disk cache.  It seems so unnecessary, therefore, I have assumed that I must be doing something wrong.

    Thank you for responding.  I use a PC and I only have 4 Gigs of RAM, and I know I should have at least 8 to fully utilize Premiere Pro, but it is what it is.  I also use Microsoft Security Essentials.  But, what I didn't understand is that it only happens when I access AE.  I've got lots of videos on Premiere CS6, and I never, ever get that warning about the disk being full when I access it.
    Oh well.  When it becomes a real problem I'll make sure I get to the bottom of it.  For now, it's not keeping me from doing anything, but it's quite annoying.

  • Disk caching on host or guest?

    OK, this is probably a noob question, but if we have 64GB RAM on our HyperV (2008R2) host, and we are running disk intensive software, do we:
    a) Allocate the 'minimum' RAM to the guest, and leave the rest for the host to use for disk caching, or
    b) Allocate the maximum RAM to the guest (leaving 1GB for the host), and let the guest use it for disk caching?
    Allocating half & half would seem to be a waste as they will probably both end up caching the same data (will they?), but it's not clear whether we're best letting the host or the guest do the caching. Or does it actually matter at all?
    I've had a good look around and haven't been able to find any relevant recommendations.
    More Info - the 'disk intensive' software is mainly a PostgreSQL server. We'll give that about 8GB for its shared buffers, but it seems to be recommended to use OS disk caching beyond that. There is a 1GB BBWC P420i RAID controller so write caching is performed
    on that. Currently, our biggest performance bottleneck seems to be due to uncached reads, so we are increasing the host RAM from 16GB to 64GB (and adding an SSD for index storage), but just want to know whether it's best to increase the guest RAM allocation,
    or leave it 'spare' on the host.

    OK, this is probably a noob question, but if we have 64GB RAM on our HyperV (2008R2) host, and we are running disk intensive software, do we:
    a) Allocate the 'minimum' RAM to the guest, and leave the rest for the host to use for disk caching, or
    b) Allocate the maximum RAM to the guest (leaving 1GB for the host), and let the guest use it for disk caching?
    Allocating half & half would seem to be a waste as they will probably both end up caching the same data (will they?), but it's not clear whether we're best letting the host or the guest do the caching. Or does it actually matter at all?
    I've had a good look around and haven't been able to find any relevant recommendations.
    More Info - the 'disk intensive' software is mainly a PostgreSQL server. We'll give that about 8GB for its shared buffers, but it seems to be recommended to use OS disk caching beyond that. There is a 1GB BBWC P420i RAID controller so write caching is performed
    on that. Currently, our biggest performance bottleneck seems to be due to uncached reads, so we are increasing the host RAM from 16GB to 64GB (and adding an SSD for index storage), but just want to know whether it's best to increase the guest RAM allocation,
    or leave it 'spare' on the host.
    With Windows Server 2008 R2 / Hyper-V 2.0 you don't have that many options as VHD access is not cached by host. At all... So you'd better allocate move VM memory as I/O would be cached inside a VM. Windows Server 2012 R2 / Hyper-V 3.0 would give you more
    caching options that include Read-Only CSV Cache, Flash-based Write-Back Cache coming with Tiering and also SMB access is also extensively cached @ both client and server sides. See:
    CSV Cache
    http://blogs.msdn.com/b/clustering/archive/2013/07/19/10286676.aspx
    Write Back Cache
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn387076.aspx
    Hyper-V over SMB
    http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj134187.aspx
    So it could be a good idea to upgrade to Windows Server 2012 R2 now :) 
    You may deploy third-party software to do a RAM and flash cache but you need to think twice as it could be simply dangerous - no reboot you may lose gigabytes of your transactions...
    Hope this helped a bit :)
    StarWind VSAN [Virtual SAN] clusters Hyper-V without SAS, Fibre Channel, SMB 3.0 or iSCSI, uses Ethernet to mirror internally mounted SATA disks between hosts.

  • Strange performance issue with 3510/3511 SAM-FS disk cache

    Hi there!
    I'm running a small SAM-QFS environment and have some strange performance issue on the disk storage part, which somebody here might be able to explain.
    Configuration: one 3510, dual controller, RAID-5 9+1, one hot spare and one disk not configured for whatever reason. The R5 logical drive hosts a 150GB LUN for SAM-QFS metadata (mm in SAM-FS speak) and a 1TB LUN for data (mr in SAM-FS speak). Further, there are two small LUNs (2GB, 100GB) for some other purpose. Those two LUNs have nearly no I/O. All disks are SUN146G. Host connection is 2GBit, multipathing enabled and working.
    Then the disk cache became too small, and the customer added a 3511 expansion unit with SUN300G disks. One logical drive is a RAID-1, 1+1, used for NetBackup catalog. The other is a RAID-5, 8+1, providing two LUNs: 260GB SAM-FS metadata (mm) and 1.999TB SAM-FS data (mr).
    For SAM-FS, the LUNs form two file systems: one "residing" in the 3510, the other "residing" in the 3511 expansion. Cabling is according to the manual and checked several times by several independant people. Operating system is Solaris 10, hardware is a V880.
    The problem we observe: SAM-FS I/O on LUNs on disks inside the 3510 is fine. With iostat, I see 100MB/s read and 50MB/s write at the same time. On the SAM-FS file system which is running on the two LUNs in the 3511, the limit seems to be at 40MB/s read/write. Both SAM-FS file systems are configured the same in regards of block size.
    In case I have activity on both SAM-FS file systems, I see 100MB/s+ on the LUN running inside the controller shelf and another 40MB/s on the disk runnin in the 3511 expansion chassis. So, the controller is easily capable of handling 150MB/s.
    Cache settings in the 3510 controller are default I think (wasn't installed by me), batteries are fine.
    Is this 40MB/s we experience a limitation by the expansion shelf? Don't think so. Anybody has any ideas on this? What parameters to check or to change? Any hint appreciated. I can also provide further details if needed. Thank you.
    wolfgang

    SUN300G disks sound like 300GB FC disks.
    Depending on how many files are in the SAMFS file system, sharing the mm and mr devices on the same RAID array can be a pretty horrible idea. In my opinion and experience, it's almost always better to NEVER put more than one LUN on a RAID array. Period. Putting more than one LUN on an array results in IO contention on that array. And large, unnaturally configured (9+1? Why?) RAID arrays will have problems from the start.
    What are the block sizes used on the RAID arrays? It wouldn't surprise me to see that the RAID array on the expansion tray has a very large block size. Larger block sizes are, in general, not better. Especially for SAMFS metadata - which IIRC is something like 8k or 16k blocks.
    I suspect what is happening is most of the metadata updates are going to the mm device on the new array, contending with the IO operations on the file data.
    How much space is left on each mm device? What does "iostat -sndxz 2" show when you're having the IO problems?

  • Install error on CC and ERROR code 50. Also AE would crash due to full disk cache and close unable to select from menu to change.

    I have recently installed and used Creative Cloud and also install several applications. The apps and cc ran fine but Adobe AE would crash upon startup of the app in which is prompted a message stating ...the drive which it is installed on does not have enough memory or disk cache is full. Please change in preferences. I attempt to do so but AE shuts down after I select ok. I installed the cleaner tool and uninstalled all Adobe products and attempted to reinstall creative cloud and now I get a "...We've encountered the following issues: Creative Cloud desktop failed to install. (Error code:50)
    I have been trying to resolve this issue for three weeks now which I did finally get it to work by opening the AE by selecting a AE file. I was able to use it 3 times for the amount charged for the monthly fee and I also downloaded several of the other apps but was
    unable to use them due to this issue then uninstalled with Adobe cleaner tool!
    PLEASE HELP!
    Message was edited by: Paul Whitehurst

    Jeff,
    I have tried to install on another drive after downloading Creative Cloud clean-up and uninstalled all adobe creative cloud. So if I erase my temp folders it might work?
    Please help I have basically paid for my 2nd month and only used a few times.
    Thanks,
    Paul

  • Error Message: Disk Cache folder doesn't exist

    I know this has already been asked, but I am aware that I HAVE deleted the disk cache folder by accident, and it is no longer in the recycle bin. Is there anywhere i can go to restore the Disk Cache folder, or redownload it? How does it affect me to work without it? Thanks

    Just create a new folder and point to it in the preferences. It's as easy as that.
    You could also delete your preferences, re-launch, and everything should be restored.

  • After Effects on mac error message, Disk Cache, can't do anything (CS6)

    Hello,
    My name is Lukas.
    Everytime when I open my After Effects, the render window opens up and an error about the Disk - Cache appears.
    I own the version 11.0.4.2 for CS6.
    I cleared the DC already, I do have enough available Disk space, but I cant do anything.
    All I can do is to open up the preferences Window and change Settings.
    I can't do nothing in the rest of the menu bar (for example open up a new composition).
    (I'm sorry for my english, my motherlanguage is german)
    I would be very happy if you could help me with my problem!
    Thanks in advance!

    Na dann erzähl uns doch nochmal alles richtig. Aus dem Gestammel wird keiner schalu, zumal du uns keinerlei Informationen gegeben hast, wo denn der Cache liegt, wie deine Festplatten organisiert sind und welches System du verwendest...
    Mylenium

  • Is After Effects CC disk cache taking up double the space on my RAID 0 SSD? Should I move it?

    In AE CC the available space on my RAID 0 (2 x 120GB SSD) drive drops from 100GB to around 40GB as soon as I do even a small RAM preview and even though I have set the disk cache in the preferences to 30GB. It also causes AE to prompt that I may not have enough space on the drive for the amount of cache I have set in preferences even though there appears to be 40GB left on it.
    I really value working with long fast RAM previews but other than that I'm not sure if the performance is jeopardised at all here. At one point I was enjoying 60GB of disk cache.
    RAID 0 is striped so it shouldn't take up double the space, am I right?
    I am about to install a RAID 0 HDD (2 x 3TB) for source files as I work with video a lot and have a 4K RAW project on the go so no time like the present. So should I move the disk cache from the ridiculously fast RAID 0 SSD to the new RAID HDD drive (as suggested in Harm's guide)?

    Thank you Mylenium. All this time I have been absolutely convinced that you don't need to defragment SSDs. Is this a complete misunderstanding? Even if you do though, I have Windows 8 (not 8.1) which is doing that once a week automatically (apparently even to SSDs).
    Are you saying that the 30GB disk cache set up works like a contiguous file?
    i7 3930k (12 virtual cores) on P9X79 Deluxe
    2 x 120GB Force GT Raid 0 SSD on SATA 6gb/s is my boot drive as well as where I keep programs and the disk cache. I do a disk clean up to remove temp files a couple of times a week but that's all.
    1 x 3TB Barracuda on on SATA 6gb/s for back ups and exports
    3TB Lacie on USB 3 for source video and project files
    2TB Lacie on USB 3 for archive projects
    660ti 2GB
    I'll try a manual defrag of my RAID 0 SSDs now.

  • Forcing the disk cache to be written to disk

    Hi all. We are looking for a way to insure the content of the icommon in the ufs on disk as we need to read it. However, calling sync is async and does not seem to provide what we're looking for. When a file is updated, created all the information is not immediately written to disk. It is kept in the unified memory and later flushed to the disk cache which then writes it down on the media. However, since we're reading the hot FS we need to force ALL file metadata AND data to be written to the media.
    Seems like when I run the command 'ff', probably as a side-effect, this is happening. ff takes too long and is at the FS level. Is it a side-effect, or does 'ff' calls a specific func (truss did not reveal anything useful).
    Thanks all and best regards.

    I. What is really happening under the hood?
    1.sync(2) passes execution into kernel mode
    2.kernel function syssync() is called then
    3.then vfs_sync(0)
    4.eventually ufs_sync(vfsp,�) is called with NULL as a first argument
    in case of NULL(as a 1st arg) ufs_sync() just schedules but does not necessarily completes the writing of ufs metadata before returning.
    So, this behavior completely matches with one described in man section for sync(2).
    II. directio does not solve your problem because it affects only the way the file data( not metadata) goes to disk. ( read directio(3C) and mount_ufs(1M) carefully )
    III. What you really need
    May be it seems to be a heavy weapon for you but one of the possibilities is:
         To write a loadable system call (loadable kernel module) that will
    invoke ufs_sync() with proper arguments (non NULL vfsp) for mounted file
    system of interest.

  • Shake warning - Disc cache locked...

    I'm learning Shake on a G5 - 2.3ghz, OS 10.5.6 leopard - It seems to crash a lot and when I reboot it a box appears saying - Warning, disc cache is locked due to another Shake UI running or a previous session crashing. Remove lock or move current cache? I've tried reinstalling Shake but the warning continues to appear. How do I get rid of this or unlock the disc cache? Thanks

    See here:
    http://www.digitalrebellion.com/blog/posts/shakeerror_disk_cachelocked.html

  • Media/Disk cache, etc. setup for a desktop and laptop dual configuration

    Hi,
    (New User)
    I have a desktop at home, and a laptop.  I split my time about 50/50 between the two.  I use it for AE, PP, PS mainly
    Desktop hard drive setup:
    1 SSD (Currently, Windows 8 and Adobe CC installed)
    2 - 1TB (7200rpm) drives (1 drive is where I put my project files (gets sync'd with google drive) and the other drive isn't being used at the moment)
    Laptop:
    1TB Hard drvie (Of course, Win 8 and Adobe CC installed)  (And, the folder where I do my projects gets sync'd with google drive).
    As you can see, because I split my time between a laptop and desktop, I need to be working with the most current files (which is why I sync them through google drive).
    My question is (please remember I am new), where should I set up disk cache, media cache, and anything else so that it is effecient and more importantly so I can use either my laptop or desktop to work on the same files?
    Again, I barely know what I am talking about here.  I really don't understand what media cache, disk cache, etc. is.  I am trying to learn but I want to get this setup first so I can start with the tutorials on lynda.com.
    Thanks,
    Chris

    First you do not need disk cache for all projects. For some it may even get in the way. Second, put your disk cache wherever you would like. If you have a second drive that is fast, use that. If you have room on your SSD drive, use that.
    If you get into trouble with a comp and previews are fouled up or things just don't look right, empty your disk cache. It's not a necessity for working with AE, it's just a convenience for some projects that may help you work a little faster.

  • Disk Cache memory problem

    Hello,
    I am using 5.5 AF (Mac) my Disk cache memory was full. Whenever i start application I got this massage & its effects on speed. Can some one guide me how do I clear it?
    Thanks.

    The same answer that I gave you here:
    http://www.videocopilot.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=116607

  • Best place to install After Effects, and best place to have AE Disk Cache

    Hey, I have a new Samsung 840 EVO 250gb which I know I am already gonna install my OS on it, but not sure what to do with After Effects. I have heard it is good to have your Disk Cache on an SSD for better write performance, but should I have After Effects also installed on the SSD, or have AE installed on the Seagate Mechanical 1TB hard drive that I have now?
    Thanks,
    Jacob

    I'd put the OS & application software on the hard drive.  The reason: once launched, there aren't nearly as many read-write instances as there would be for an AE cache.  You launch the OS... what, once a day?  How about applications.... maybe 3-4 times a day?
    On the other hand, when the AE cache is on the SSD, it it reads & writes to it all the time.  That's where you want the real speed.
    It might be nice to launch in the blink of an eye, but you're taking up valuable -- and pricey --  SSD real estate with OS & applications, things that aren't used all that often in comparison to the AE cache.

Maybe you are looking for