Aperture not using RAM?

I'm wondering how I can speed Aperture up a little, it seems pretty slow.
One thing I've noticed is that Aperture (2.14) doesn't use much RAM at all - I have 16 GB of RAM in a Mac Pro, approximately 200K referenced images on a RAID that is separate from the system drives. When I load more images or do an action where the system gives me the beach ball, Aperture uses less than 1GB of memory and usually far less.
Any ideas?

In my experience with aperture 3, the program uses as much RAM as it needs, but it also seems to try and avoid swapping if possible.
On my mac pro with 18GB of ram, I've seen it use up to about 6GB while zooming in on a heavily brushed 5d2 raw file. This exact same process on my macbook pro with 4GB of ram didn't really go past 3 GB of ram usage.
To answer your original question on how to speed it up - Upgrade to aperture 3, and 10.6.3 if you haven't already. Since you use referenced masters, the upgrade will be less painless. Just create a blank aperture 3 library and use File->Import library to Copy your current aperture 2 referenced library. It will import it and leave the original in tact.
You can do this with the trial version even to test it out. A 200K referenced library in aperture 3 should be about 80GB. Just be aware that switching back and forth between v2 and v3 will probably require manually deleting preferences and preset files each time you switch versions.
And you'd probably want to disable faces and auto preview generation during import too.

Similar Messages

  • Photoshop CS4 does NOT use RAM as scratch disk

    Photoshop CS4 does NOT use RAM as scratch disk
    as far as I can tell.
    I have 20 GB RAM and still Photoshop uses the hard disk as scratch disk.
    (OS = Win 7 64).
    Can I force the use of RAM as scratch disk?
    /Larry

    Hi PECourtejoie,
    I really try to understand this, please.
    I don't know if 'Hitting the hard disk brings unacceptable slowdowns in my workflow'.
    Because I don't know what unacceptable slowdowns are.
    Any operation in Phshp takes time, and you always want it to go as fast as possible..
    I know that if Phshp only worked against RAM instead of constantly saving to (and reading from) the hard drive it ought to go faster.
    But I still don't know if this is the case, because there is a constant use of a tempfile on the hard drive's Scratch disk!
    So far I understand that Phshp may BOTH work in RAM AND save data to the hard drive Scratch disk.
    It could be possible that the writing to the hard disk happens when Phshp is idle from other tasks and that the reading only happens when data has disappeared from the Cache in RAM.
    That could be a scenario where a Scratch disk on Hard drive doesn't  interfere with Phshps performance, and an explanation why we should not bother about the Scratch disk on the hard drive.
    But I would very much like to have some confirmation on this, IF this is the explanation of how the Scratch disk on a hard drive works without influencing Phshp's performance??
    Everybody just seem to assume that Photoshop uses (some) parts of RAM as work space - I just need a better understanding of this. And some correct descriptions.
    /Larry

  • Is there a way to hibernate tab groups so that they do not use RAM memory?

    Is there a way to hibernate tab groups so that they do not use RAM memory? I have a lot of tabs open and have organized them into tabgroups but my computer still uses a lot of the RAM on mozilla. Can I hibernate some of the tabgroups in any way?

    There was a bug filed in 2010, but it seems like it's halted.
    *https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=591775 <sub>Please don't comment on bug reports. See [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html Bugzilla etiquette]
    I found an extension that might do this, but it's incompatible for me (Nightly in Linux)
    *https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bartab/

  • Oracle 9i is not using RAM

    Hi,
    I am working on Windows Server 2003 R2 , it contains 32GB RAM. Oracle 9i R2 is installed on it but it is not using more than 150MB of RAM. How i can fix this problem because my applications and other huge stored procedures are not getting memory.

    SQL> show parameter sga_max_size;
    NAME TYPE VALUE
    sga_max_size big integer 135338868
    SQL> show parameter db_cache_size;
    NAME TYPE VALUE
    db_cache_size big integer 25165824
    SQL> show parameter shared_pool_size;
    NAME TYPE VALUE
    shared_pool_size big integer 50331648

  • Aperture not returning RAM

    Hi, it seems that I am the first one to post this.
    I have been using Aperture a lot this week adding keywords to loads of photos taken in the last 4 months (had been slack and it was time to get on with it).
    Since I have started I have noticed that my machine was running slower and slower....
    I have now realised after monitoring my machine that Aperture seems to be causing this.
    When I spend a long time on Aperture, and when I quite it, my RAM goes up to 4.5Gig used when Aperture is sharing the previews, but when Aperture is finished and quit, My Ram usage doesn't go back down...
    Anyone else had that problem to confirm this before I send feed back to Apple?
    Let me know

    I have a one year old Intel iMac with 2Gb and the 256Mb X1600 card and i have to say i'm becoming increasingly disappointed with just how slow Aperture is making my machine run.......
    not being able to jump between various images quickly defeats the whole purpose of Aperture! and having to close Aperture to complete semi-power hungry applications almost defeats the whole purpose of switching from a cheap PC to £1500 iMac
    I had the extras to make life smooth and painlesss, are Apple living up to there own hype? I'm begining to think not.
    20" Intel iMac   Mac OS X (10.4.9)   256 X1600 Card / 2Gb RAM
    20" Intel iMac   Mac OS X (10.4.9)   256 X1600 Card / 2Gb RAM

  • Photoshop CS4 not using RAM

    I'm aware that Photoshop CS4 (Mac) is a 32 bit application and therefore limited to 4 GB of RAM.
    My Mac (OSX Lion) has 8 GB of RAM. So I would expect Photoshop to use 4 GB of it, but in the preferences dialogue it only lists 3072 MB "available" RAM, and even suggests to only use 1689 – 2211 MB of it. (Obviously Photoshop assumes that the Mac has not more than 4 GB of total RAM and that the user must be protected from allocating too much RAM to Photoshop.) But although I told Photoshop to use at least those 3072 MB which it assumes to be available, it doesn't even do that: According to the activity monitor, no matter how big a file is and how low the "efficiency" drops, it never uses more than 2.45 GB of RAM.
    What's going on? How can I make Photoshop to use at least those 3072 MB? Is there a trick to make it use the full 4 GB which it should be able to see?

    While the address space available to a 32 bit application is theoretically 4 Gig, the reality is that the OS takes a lot of space, plus the space taken by loading the application binaries and OS library code. That leaves around 3 Gig available.  After working for a while, the address space gets fragmented -- 1 Gig total might be available, but it's scattered in 1 Meg pieces around the address space so you can't really allocate a large buffer.  And as you work, the OS consumes more address space for it's purposes and Photoshop frees up space as needed.
    If Photoshop uses all the available address space, then the MacOS code will start crashing because it assumes that it will always be able to allocate more memory.  And many third party plugins assume that they'll be able to allocate large chunks of memory, and tend to crash when they can't.  So Photoshop can't safely use 100% of the available address space (hence the preference).
    All in all, what you're describing sounds normal for a 32 bit application.

  • When I external edit an aperture photo using Photoshop Elements 9 and then get out, the changes are not reflected in Aperture when I return - this used to work for me but doesn't seem to have for some time - help please?

    Have used Aperture for some time - at some point this stopped working - not sure when
    workflow:
    click photo and elect to use the external editor (Photoshop Elements 9)
    Copy of the photo is created in Aperture with the "O" badge and I am rolled out to Photoshop
    Have to change the type to 8-bit in Photoshop to start making changes
    When done and I exit I am prompted to save the photo
    On returning to Aperture however the "O" badged photo does not get updated/reflect my changes
    Other Things:
    I can find a changed photo sitting in the Aperture Library using finder or Photoshop itself - so I know changes have been made a new file saved (TIFF).
    I am wondering if I am missing some (new) preference such that the changes are not proerly being saved for re-display/storage in the Aperture Library
    I am running Lion OSX at the moment but the behaviour was the same under Snow Lepoard versions.
    Current version of Aperture is 3.1.3, Elements is 9.0
    Any help/suggestions greatfully received

    Try using psd.  Some rerports indicate some confustion between the apps with TIFF.  See:
    https://discussions.apple.com/message/15921933#15921933
    I cannot confirm, nor test, since I use PS CS5, and not Elements.
    Ernie

  • Could not use the Brush tool because there is not enough RAM? Photoshop CS6?

    That and I couldn't even save a project I was working because (There was not enough RAM)
    My computer is running Windows 7 with 4 (3 usable) GB Ram, Pentium Dual Core; @ 2.00 Ghz
    -I have allocated all possible RAM to CS6
    -I set 6 scratch disks (the first two are 1TB external HDD)
    -I fixed the file peeling so that there is quite a bit of it
    - I have Photoshop CS5 still installed (it works fine) as well as Elements 9, I don't know if that could be a problem or not.
    I like the new features of CS6 especially the new 5000 px brush, but half the time I can't even use it because of this problem! What can I do to fix it?
    I mostly use it for digital art so the pictures get to be at most 5000-3300 pixels. I get the problem mostly when I use brushes at 5000 px. CS5 works just fine and it uses the scratch disks I emplace, it seems as though CS6 doesn't even use them.

    Obviously, you are running Win7 32-bit OS. Is that correct?
    What are the full specs. of your Windows Virtual Memory, the Page File? What is its size, location, and is it static, or dynamically managed?
    With a 32-bit OS, I would set the Page File to a fast, internal, physical HDD, set it to be statically managed, and size it to about 2.5x the installed RAM (~ 10GB in your case, and with a 32-bit OS).
    That should provide more resources, and by being statically managed, save you CPU cycles too.
    I also agree that you do NOT want to allocate all RAM to PS, as the OS needs some too. That will be counter-productive.
    Good luck,
    Hunt

  • HELP: Premiere Pro CC not using all CPU and RAM during rendering and export

    Hello,
    I am using Premiere Pro CC on a Windows 7. My timeline is quite simple with two videos, one with the movie (mpeg) and the other with the subtitles (avi).
    When I render the sequence in PP or export, the rendering time is way too slow and it only uses around 15-20% of the CPU and 3 GB of RAM.
    My hardware config is :
    - CPU : i7-4770k 3.50Ghz
    - RAM : 8 GB
    - Disk : 2 x 3 TB SATA (no raid)
    RAM is not the bottleneck, neither the disk access.
    I have tried rendering and exporting the same project on an iMac (with an i5 2.7 Ghz and 4 GB RAM and only 1 disk) and the result is 4x faster !!!
    The CPU usage is close to 100% as well as RAM usage.
    So how come PP uses all resources availble on an iMac and not on a Windows 7 ?
    Is there any known bug or software bottleneck on Windows 7 ?
    My machine is brand new and nothing much installed besides Adobe products.
    Any help is very much appreciated.
    Thanks,

    I just rendered out a a 2 minute sequence with about 100 clips in it and Colorista effects on everything to the Vimeo 1080 H264 preset. It took about 5 minutes to render straight from Premiere, it used all the recourses it could, my CPU was running at near %100, same with my ram and GPU, I was happy.
    Then I did another render with Red Giant Denoiser and it now wants to take 30 mins and it is only using about %20 of the recourses available. My problem isn't that its taking longer with Denoiser but that its not using all of my computers CPU and GPU.
    Im rendering at maximum render quality and bit dept to H264 (Im happy to wait the extra time), if I try to use VRB 2 it encodes 1 pass at a time and wants to take up to 40 minutes.
    I would appreciate some advice on this.
    Premiere Pro CC 2013
    2.6 GHz Intel Core i7
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M 2048 MB (CUDA GPU enabled in Premiere)
    16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
    OS X 10.9.4 (13E28)

  • After Effects not using free RAM?

    Hi there
    Just like to ask question regarding after effects and ram usage.
    I remember before I installed the app Memory Booster - that allows you to keep track of how much ram, there was a healthy use of RAM there from after effects.
    But i noticed today, whilst rendering and doing background cache rendering, the free RAM still available stays at around 4GB and I am wondering why it's not using this free RAM to help faster rendering?
    this is my current multi-processing/ram settings on AE- essentially it should be using up to 6.5 GB of RAM as i allocated as I need faster rendering? Just wondering why it's staying stuck at around 3-4GB of free RAM on my system when it could clearly be used by AE. I want AE to use the RAM as it is the only running program on my system when i work!
    Memory Booster down to 3.18GB with one safari tab open for Adobe forums, when exiting, it jumps back up to 4GB free RAM
    Confused!
    Thanks

    Different projects, different footage attributes, different AE features used, different effects used, different delivery specs....
    ...are you comparing apples to apples, or apples to ORANGES?  We don't know that.

  • I'm a normal user, using cad programme, not using my laptop for games, my question is: do I need to get 16 gb ram in my retina macbook pro or 8  gb ram is pretty enough?

    I'm a normal user, using cad programme, not using my laptop for games, my question is: do I need to get 16 gb ram in my retina macbook pro or 8  gb ram is pretty enough?
    Thanks for support.

    8 GB may be sufficient for CAD but 16 would be a much better idea.
    All the Macs I have ever owned were eventually upgraded to the maximum amount of memory they could use. Considering that as of now, the RAM you specify is all the RAM you will ever have, get as much as you can. That is the only way to maximize its economic life.
    If Apple offered a 32 GB version I'd get it.

  • Upgraded to 8GB RAM - Windows 7 64-Bit Not Using All of It

    I just upgraded my 3.02GHz MacbookPro to 8GB RAM and in both Mac and Windows (64-Bit) it acknowledges that I have 8GB installed. However in Windows 7's task manager it shows:
    Total Physical Memory 8167MB
    Cached 4500MB
    Available 4557MB
    Free 91MB
    and it shows I'm only using 3.51GB....Why only 91MB free? In Adobe Illustrator I am getting not enough RAM errors so it seems like Windows 7 is tapping out at the old 4GB ceiling. Anyone know if this is a setting that is easily modified so I can use all 8GB?
    Thanks!

    mine too same time as well

  • Not using all the ram

    Hi!
    I"m wondering, I have FCE exporting a video while iMovie is importing one. I see that my Macbook is only using 750 mg of ram. How come it doesn't use the whole 2 gigs?

    There are no options that cover RAM usage in the Energy Saver System Preferences. In fact, with a MacBook, you can't even select "better performance" usage of your processor. This functionality is built-in to the processor and there is no GUI for adjusting it in Mac OS X. So, there are no options you can configure to alter the amount of RAM used or not used with Mac OS X, it's all automatic.
    -Doug

  • Logic 8 not using all RAM

    I'm running Logic 8 on a MacPro 8-core with 13 GB of RAM, but Logic always crashes once it's used about 6.5 GB of memory. I'm trying to run a lot of sample libraries and plugins at once (Vienna Instruments, EWQLSO with Kontakt2, Stylus, EXS24 instruments, etc.), but it reaches a limit and crashes, telling me "could not allocate enough memory" and other memory messages like that. How can I get Logic to use the rest of my RAM that's just sitting there?

    Ok here's your first problem... 13 gigs of ram. If you read and pay attention to Apple's info, you'll see that they highly recommend you pair up the RAM chips and use the same ones, otherwise you're using 64bit memory addressing as opposed to 128, which of course means processing things faster. Look at your RAM configuration and look at which ones are not paired up, I'm thinking you have a pair of 512MB DIMMS in there which should be taken out, yes you'll lose a gig, big deal, you'll gain speed.
    Second, Logic can't use more than 4 gigs of RAM. It's not a 64bit application. 64bit as it's compiled, I am not talking about the audio engine. The fact that it reaches 6.5GB is because EXS24 has its way of starting up more processes which can use 4gigs of ram Each. Logic itself is not using the 4 gigs.
    The reason you crash is because one of the plugins you're using is not written properly to let Logic know that it's running out of RAM, and hence Logic tried to take up more and crashes because it can't address more than 4gigs of ram, and when it does... boom. As an example of that, BFD 1.5 used to be like that, until FX rewrote their code to work properly, and now when BFD2 tries to get above what Logic is capable of, it stops loading samples and throws up a little popup telling you you're running out of memory.
    Your problem is not logic, it's one of those plugins which is not written properly.
    R

  • Aperture not responding after using a sharpening brush

    anyone have a problem with aperture not responding after makeing a mod to a pic

    What is your Aperture version?  Aperture 2 and 1 do not work well with MacOS X 10.9.3.

Maybe you are looking for