5 Replies Latest reply on Dec 3, 2012 4:30 AM by Dave Laban

    "Inadequate disk space in the working directory for the Iterative solver"

    John Sutherland

      Given that directories expand to fill the partition, I suppose they mean the working partion/drive.

       

      So is that the boot drive or the Solidworks drive or the page file drive?

       

      Is the space required permanently or only for the duration of the calculation?

       

      If I double the model size will the required space double?

       

      Your answers will help me figure out where to allocate extra resources.

        • Re: "Inadequate disk space in the working directory for the Iterative solver"
          Dave Laban

          It will be the drive where the results are saved to (Study Properties; Results Folder).

           

          Run space is greater than results space.  Particularly large problems will generate temp files with extension .101, .102, .103 etc. that cycle around and write over themselves.  It is not uncommon for me to have about 20Gb of temp files generating a results (.cwr) file of 2Gb.

           

          Model size is not directly proportional to disk space in my experience.  Though yes, obviously the larger the model the larger the space required.

           

          Are these questions for helping to spec a new workstation, or for other troubleshooting?

            • Re: "Inadequate disk space in the working directory for the Iterative solver"
              John Sutherland

              I currently have only a 147 GB hard drive.  It seems that if I add a 300 GB hard drive and push the non SW stuff and the page file onto it (perhaps also the results folder) then I should be OK for a while AND I won't upset the SW installation.

               

              I can test this in the short term by allocating the results folder to the 70 GB partition which I cleared out for the page file (that was necessary to achieve meshing).

               

              You have been very helpful Dave.

                • Re: "Inadequate disk space in the working directory for the Iterative solver"
                  Dave Laban

                  For what it's worth, my setup uses a 128Gb drive for Windows / SolidWorks / Abaqus / MS Office etc., and then I have a second "Analysis" hard disk on to which my part files and results are saved.  Data storage/archiving is then handled with a network drive once I have completed a task.

                   

                  Each drive is a 15k rpm mechanical drive.  I experience no measurable performance loss having SW installed on one drive and having the parts/results written to another.

                  • Re: "Inadequate disk space in the working directory for the Iterative solver"
                    John Sutherland

                    Moving the Results folder to a partition with more space solved the error message problem.

                     

                    I saved the mesh and tried the solver several times, but failed to get a result.

                     

                    Studying the Windows Task Manager display and the HDD LED, made me suspect that the HDD was thrashing.

                     

                    Googling for others experience with pagefile found an explanation of page faults.

                     

                    Looking again at Task Manager I saw that after 11 hours of solving, the only parameter that was incrementing was page faults.  It seems that with 8 GB of RAM and 30 GB of pagefile, I was going nowhere because the system could not get  into RAM the various pages required to complete the solution.

                     

                    So whereas I was inclined to buy more disk for temporary files because I could never have enough RAM for the biggest job I might attempt, I now understand why RAM is a better purchase.

                     

                    If I find I still need temporary filespace then SSD looks to be the answer because it appears that the 4K cluster size matches the 4K page size, whereas HDD cluster size of 512K is a legacy of sequential (apps & docs) data files where there was no problem in bringing more data than you asked for because it would probably be the next lot you wanted anyway (so we had cache).  Reducing HDD cluster size increases the overhead of latency and seek, thus tearing your trousers

                     

                    How do you see this?