PQ Cache- What is it?

[rottielover]

EDIT: See 3rd post

[LOG 11:01:37.731] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 4352

[LOG 11:01:45.826] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 4608

[LOG 11:01:52.457] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 4864

[LOG 11:02:02.007] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 5120

[LOG 11:02:05.845] [Orbit Targeter]: Target is null

[LOG 11:02:11.044] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 5376

[LOG 11:02:22.074] PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 5632

So this shows up in my KSP.log I'm just curious as to what it is, because I keep hitting the 3.6Gb mem cap and crashing out. This seems to be a contributing factor.

I have a dizzying array of plugin addon's right now, and not very many part packs. I'm using --force-opengl in combo with Active Texture Manager to try and reduce things as much as possible, but I'm thinking I just have 1 too many plugins.

Review of the output-log also shows these PQ Cache Messages : PQSCache: Increased PQ Cache by 256 to 5888

Since someone's going to complain if I don't give logs files, here! = https://www.dropbox.com/s/kxogobdgvz6dvtd/logs.rar?dl=0

Edited November 12, 2014 by rottielover

[rottielover]

partial add-ons list :

KSP: 0.25 (Win32) - Unity: 4.5.2f1 - OS: Windows 8.1 (6.3.9600) 64bit

USI Tools - 0.2.4

Asteroid Recycling Tech - 0.5.4

Chatterer - 0.7.1.86

CIT - CIT_Util - 1.0.4

CIT - KERT - 1.1.2

Community Resource Pack - 0.2.3

DMagic Orbital Science - 0.8.6.1

Kerbal Engineer Redux - 0.6.2.12

Ferram Aerospace Research - 0.14.3.2

Fine Print - 0.59

Firespitter - 6.3.5

RasterPropMonitor - 0.18.3

Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - 2.4.4

KSP-AVC Plugin - 1.1.5

Modular Rocket Systems - 1.1

ORSX - 0.1.3

RCS Build Aid - 0.5.2

RealChute - 1.2.5.2

RemoteTech - 1.5.1

SCANsat - 1.0.9.2

StageRecovery - 1.5.1

TAC Fuel Balancer - 2.4.1.5

TAC Life Support - 0.10.1.13

Trajectories - 0.4.1

USI Exploration Pack - 0.2.5

Freight Transport Tech - 0.2.4

Karbonite - 0.4.4

Karbonite Plus - 0.2.3

MKS - 0.21.3

USI Survivability Pack - 0.1.3

Universal Storage (Core) - 0.9.3.25

Universal Storage (KAS) - 0.9.0.14

Universal Storage (TAC) - 0.9.2.7

[rottielover]

For those lurking, I solved my immediate problem by removing "Transfer Window Planner" (shows you visual "pork chop" plots). That reduced my game start RAM usage from 3.2 ish to 2.6 ish Gb.

However I'm still very curious if anyone know's what this Cache might be? I'm going to update the OP as "solved"

[NathanKell]

PQS is what the planetary terrain is. Stock KSP.

PQS cache caches built quads.

[rottielover]

Thank you Nathan!

This raises more questions however... I'm not sure why that Cache would grow and grow and grow like that. I'm going to keep removing mods and see if I can't find it. I'll start with anything possibly terrain related like custom biomes, scan sat, etc.

[Padishar]

For those lurking, I solved my immediate problem by removing "Transfer Window Planner" (shows you visual "pork chop" plots). That reduced my game start RAM usage from 3.2 ish to 2.6 ish Gb.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I find it very surprising that a mod like Transfer Window Planner would use 600 meg of ram on startup (or at any other time for that matter)...

[rottielover]

well all I can do is observe the Task Manager and report what it's showing.

I've removed the following: Stage Recovery, Trajectories, Transfer Window Planner, and Vessel Viewer

It's become a lot more stable, but still get the occasional crash.

I'm convinced something has a memory leak, but it's going to take me a while to find.

[Padishar]

I had to run a test on this and I see very little difference between a stock install and one with TWP installed. Loading to the main menu and leaving the game sat for several minutes doesn't show a measurable difference in memory usage (the slow fluctuation of commit size due to how the Mono garbage collection works overwhelms any difference). There is certainly not 600 meg of difference.

When you say "game start ram usage" do you mean starting to the main menu or are you loading a save too?