[1.0][Release-5-0][April 28, 2015] Active Texture Management - Save RAM!

[linuxgurugamer]

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question but does the x86 and the x64 version refer to the game version or the system running it?

I'm on OS X and I get crashes all of the time even on x86 aggressive.

The activity window shows a memory of 1,85GB and a virtual memory of 3,97GB. My Mac has 16GB in total.

The only mods I'm using that add parts are Realism Overhaul, SXT, Magic Orbital Science, Universal Storage, Real Chutes, Deadly Reentry, Vens Stock Revamp and the Procedural parts (Parts, Wings, Fairings). All the unneeded parts and textures are pruned.

There are some other mods but they don't add any visuals, just game mechanics and readouts.

Am I missing something here?

If you are on OSX, then you are running the x64 version.

The x86 and X64 refer to the game version, not the OS.

[mecki]

If you are on OSX, then you are running the x64 version.

The x86 and X64 refer to the game version, not the OS.

Are you sure?

I downloaded through Steam and what I understood was that there are optional 64bit versions for Windows and Linux but not Mac.

Am I wrong here?

Why would I then have crashes? Does the "virtual memory" count (which is around 4GB every time I crash) or the physical memory?

Thanks!

[LameLefty]

If you are on OSX, then you are running the x64 version.

The x86 and X64 refer to the game version, not the OS.

No, he's not. OS X has been 64-bit for several years but KSP for OS X is still 32-bit due to Unity limitations.

mecki, you need to use the x86 version of ATM. For what it's worth, mecki, KSP 0.90 is less stable on my Mac than any prior version, even when I was playing pure stock. I regularly crash at under 3 GB of memory with the current version, whereas I used to comfortably bump up against the 3.5 GB 32-bit ceiling for hours at a time without crashing under some prior versions. Mods don't seem to make much difference to my stability on 0.90.

That said, I don't think the "aggressive" version is worth the added loss of texture resolution. I "basic" version does reduce my memory by several hundred megabytes, and I can usually play for several hours straight between crashes (usually with memory right about 2.9 GB).

[mecki]

No, he's not. OS X has been 64-bit for several years but KSP for OS X is still 32-bit due to Unity limitations.

mecki, you need to use the x86 version of ATM. For what it's worth, mecki, KSP 0.90 is less stable on my Mac than any prior version, even when I was playing pure stock. I regularly crash at under 3 GB of memory with the current version, whereas I used to comfortably bump up against the 3.5 GB 32-bit ceiling for hours at a time without crashing under some prior versions. Mods don't seem to make much difference to my stability on 0.90.

That said, I don't think the "aggressive" version is worth the added loss of texture resolution. I "basic" version does reduce my memory by several hundred megabytes, and I can usually play for several hours straight between crashes (usually with memory right about 2.9 GB).

Thanks for the clarification!

Are you talking about "physical" or "virtual" memory?

I'm not sure how to interpret the different sections in the activity window…

And something else: How come that some of the icons in the Toolbar are reduced, some are not? Is there a config file for this somewhere?

(Kerbal Alarm Clock looks fine, whereas e.g. FAR and DRE are pixelated)

Edited January 20, 2015 by mecki

[LameLefty]

Are you talking about "physical" or "virtual" memory?

I'm not sure how to interpret the different sections in the activity window…

Keep Activity Monitor open while KSP is running. This is what you want to pay attention to:

And something else: How come that some of the icons in the Toolbar are reduced, some are not? Is there a config file for this somewhere?

(Kerbal Alarm Clock looks fine, whereas e.g. FAR and DRE are pixelated)

Yes, you need to create little .cfg config files to keep ATM from compressing the textures for them. Make it a plain text file and save it in the /GameData/FerramAerspaceResearch/Textures folder. Here's what I use for FAR.

ACTIVE_TEXTURE_MANAGER_CONFIG
{
	folder = FerramAerospaceResearch
	enabled = true
	OVERRIDES
	{
		FerramAerospaceResearch/.*
		{
			compress = false
			mipmaps = false
			scale = 1
			max_size = 0
		}
	}
}

You need a similar file for each folder you want ATM to ignore. There may be a more elegant way to get ATM do ignore icons and controls, but I haven't found it.

[mecki]

Yes, you need to create little .cfg config files to keep ATM from compressing the textures for them. Make it a plain text file and save it in the /GameData/FerramAerspaceResearch/Textures folder. Here's what I use for FAR.

ACTIVE_TEXTURE_MANAGER_CONFIG
{
    folder = FerramAerospaceResearch
    enabled = true
    OVERRIDES
    {
        FerramAerospaceResearch/.*
        {
            compress = false
            mipmaps = false
            scale = 1
            max_size = 0
        }
    }
}

You need a similar file for each folder you want ATM to ignore. There may be a more elegant way to get ATM do ignore icons and controls, but I haven't found it.

Thank you! I will try this!

I just had a look at ATM's commented config file and it looks easy to understand. Though I don't know what a "normal" is.

[mitiya]

Some users have issues without the -no-singlethreaded switch. Try without, see what happens.

-force-d3d11 uses the video memory like -force-opengl, but it's have graphic issue.

-force-d3d11-no-singlethreaded work maybe little better then without it, but no even closer to -force-opengl.

[Sinsis]

Hi, it seems like ATM stops working (KSP stops loading, exe is working still though because I can see the text like "Motivating Kerbals" changing) when it tries to load/compress "TextureReplacer/Heads/Head2". Is there any way I can exclude it? (or fix it). I think this started occuring since I tried the new beta.

Edit: Also, it seems that I just can't get a memory reduction. ATM with half scaling and OpenGL and I am still getting 2.8GB on load...what could be wrong?

I just did a rerun, same issue. Cache folder becomes 691 MB.

Have used the new beta and the version before that.

Edit2: Reran aggressive. Seems like about the same mem usage as compared to basic...KSP 0.90, Win 7 x64, KSP x32. Output log of the latest run here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ab3bl0hkdgdq6kg/output_log.txt?dl=0

Edit3: Ran DDS4KSP, gave me this error:

[<SNIP>, available on page 335 (of this Active Texture Management thread). Cut to save space and to not spam this page.</SNIP>]

Seems like verything that could go wrong, IS going wrong, lol.

Details from other thread:

[<SNIP>, available on page 335 (of this Active Texture Management thread). Cut to save space and to not spam this page.</SNIP>]

Small bump if that's alright to keep it from getting lost in the previous pages. I added some more info to the post afterwards.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Sinsis

[Rebelgamer]

-force-d3d11 uses the video memory like -force-opengl, but it's have graphic issue.

-force-d3d11-no-singlethreaded work maybe little better then without it, but no even closer to -force-opengl.

Some people do have graphical issues with it, but not all. I'm lucky in that regard, and it does run smoother than with -force-opengl for me, though it doesn't reduce the memory footprint as much.

[mecki]

Thank you! I will try this!

I just had a look at ATM's commented config file and it looks easy to understand. Though I don't know what a "normal" is.

I just sent a pull request as `bax-`on Git for preserving the toolbar icons

[sota767]

I just sent a pull request as `bax-`on Git for preserving the toolbar icons

I would love to see the toolbar icons not get compressed & erased. That's my biggest ATM complaint.

[Nitrous Oxide]

I would love to see the toolbar icons not get compressed & erased. That's my biggest ATM complaint.

Except the biggest problems is that every single modder sticks their icons in a different folder... Come on guys, /Textures? Since when is a toolbar icon a texture?

How hard would it be for every modder to just use a /Icons folder...

[AlphaAsh]

Except the biggest problems is that every single modder sticks their icons in a different folder... Come on guys, /Textures? Since when is a toolbar icon a texture?

How hard would it be for every modder to just use a /Icons folder...

Why does that matter? Just automatically exclude any image of a certain file size or smaller, say 1kb. That'll very likely be an icon.

[LameLefty]

I would love to see the toolbar icons not get compressed & erased. That's my biggest ATM complaint.

Took me a little while to figure out again (thanks to the help of a couple polite posters), but you need to stick little .cfg files listing the exclusions into the folders where the Toolbar icons are kept. It's not hard, but it's a PITA to do for many different mods.

[Nitrous Oxide]

Why does that matter? Just automatically exclude any image of a certain file size or smaller, say 1kb. That'll very likely be an icon.

I'm looking at a 51kb icon, so that's not exactly a catch-all.

Took me a little while to figure out again (thanks to the help of a couple polite posters), but you need to stick little .cfg files listing the exclusions into the folders where the Toolbar icons are kept. It's not hard, but it's a PITA to do for many different mods.

Bunk, I have all my icon-exclusion configs in GameData/ATM_configs and they work fine.

[AlphaAsh]

I'm looking at a 51kb icon, so that's not exactly a catch-all. ...

Does ATM without an exclusion config make it look like mush?

If yes: Why does that matter? Just automatically exclude any image of a certain file size or smaller, say 51kb. That'll very likely be an icon.

EDIT - One line in ATM's config file. IgnoreAnyImageLessThan = Xkb

No more exclusion config for every bloody mod.

Edited January 21, 2015 by AlphaAsh

[Nitrous Oxide]

Does ATM without an exclusion config make it look like mush?

If yes: Why does that matter? Just automatically exclude any image of a certain file size or smaller, say 51kb. That'll very likely be an icon.

EDIT - One line in ATM's config file. IgnoreAnyImageLessThan = Xkb

No more exclusion config for every bloody mod.

It does actually...

This is actually with the exact same exclusion config as every other icon on the bar...

[BudgetHedgehog]

I could then argue that it is the mod authors duty to provide a not so unreasonably large icon size. 51kb is plenty large enough, as can be seen by the clear icons that weren't compressed. Trying to make a one-size-fits-all exclusion config won't work if some sizes are just way too large. Either that or you just put up with slightly fuzzy icons, I guess.

EDIT: Though, there's nothing stopping you resizing the icon yourself. Just sayin'.

[LameLefty]

Bunk, I have all my icon-exclusion configs in GameData/ATM_configs and they work fine.

My, my ... so polite you are!

Actually, the PITA part isn't where you put the .cfg files (like MM .cfg files, they'll work anywhere in /GameData) - the PITA part is having to do it in the first place, since there's no consistency where mods store each icon file. Since you've already got to dive into each mod's folder structure to determine where the assets are that you want to exclude, I've personally found it easier just to create my little file right there while I'm looking at the folder path to exclude.

YMMV.

[Nitrous Oxide]

EDIT: Though, there's nothing stopping you resizing the icon yourself. Just sayin'.

The issue with the icon in particular is not that it's the wrong size or anything, it's the fact that it's in a /Plugin/PluginData folder and ATM isn't treating it the same way as all the others. As you can see, the rest of my icons are clear because I have configs for all of them. The same config that isn't working for these RealChute icons.

Actually, the PITA part isn't where you put the .cfg files (like MM .cfg files, they'll work anywhere in /GameData) - the PITA part is having to do it in the first place, since there's no consistency where mods store each icon file. Since you've already got to dive into each mod's folder structure to determine where the assets are that you want to exclude

I feel that, that's what I had to do as well. Thus, I reiterate my first post... why can't mod makers just use a /Icons folder? It's logical and the rest of us don't have to go digging...

Edited January 21, 2015 by Nitrous Oxide
can't not can

[AlphaAsh]

Having that one setting I suggested as well as exclusion files, means far less need for exclusion files. If an icon is so big that it's not caught by the setting, well you use an exclusion config as usual. Or, as OWK suggested, you can always resize it yourself. Or bug the icon maker. The size of the icon is their responsibility. The mushing of their icons by ATM, isn't.

[Nitrous Oxide]

Having that one setting I suggested as well as exclusion files, means far less need for exclusion files. If an icon is so big that it's not caught by the setting, well you use an exclusion config as usual. Or, as OWK suggested, you can always resize it yourself. Or bug the icon maker. The size of the icon is their responsibility. The mushing of their icons by ATM, isn't.

Except can you read what I'm trying to say? I don't mind writing exclusion configs for every icon, that's not what I care about. I'm a programmer by trade, a 10-line config file isn't exactly intimidating... What I'm saying is that this icon here, this RealChutes icon, it's not supposed to be compressed by ATM because of the exact same exclusions I have for every other icon (which clearly works). The problem is that I'm not sure it's being handled properly, because it's still getting compressed. Unlike every other icon that is in modfolder/textures or modfolder/icons, the RealChute icons are in modfolder/Plugin/PluginData. My point is that modders should be using a consistent folder for their icons just like everything else. Flags have to be in a /Flags folder, why can't we apply the same concept to icons to avoid things like this?

And here's what was said in the RealChute thread... Now do you understand why I'm here?

Edited January 21, 2015 by Nitrous Oxide

[AlphaAsh]

And what I'm suggesting chap, is that with that global setting, it obviously needs to not be concerned with where an image is, just what size it is. Clearly if an exclusion config is not protecting that icon because of its location, that's an issue with ATM, not with the location of the icon.

I think we're both misreading each other. I'm actually not disagreeing with you

[LameLefty]

Again, just create a .cfg for RealChutes with the explicit folder structure to exclude. It doesn't matter where the icons are, so long as you define it.

[Nitrous Oxide]

And what I'm suggesting chap, is that with that global setting, it obviously needs to not be concerned with where an image is, just what size it is. Clearly if an exclusion config is not protecting that icon because of its location, that's an issue with ATM, not with the location of the icon.

I think we're both misreading each other. I'm actually not disagreeing with you

It's a little bit of column A, a little bit of column B really... if Chris moves his icons, my config I'm using for the rest of them work... if Chris doesn't move his icons, something needs to be changed with ATM.

Anyways, I suppose it's worth mentioning that I've tried my config in the RealChute folder as well... no dice. I'll give that global setting a try though, that's a good idea.