Memory Usage

**kitch1967** · 12 March 2009, 08:13 PM

I have created a 10 page site, with about 5 photo pages. Now when i load my saved site the program is using 1.5GB of main memory, and my saved file is 102MB. This is crazy, my previous FrontPage site, with twice as many pages was only 12MB. When i go to edit anything, or preview, or publish, i am getting "Out of Memory" errors.
I hope someone can help because i have re-did my whole site with Web Designer and now am stuck in limbo because i can't go any farther with it. Xara told me to send them the file but i can't even do that because the file is too large and their mail server rejected it!

**steve.ledger** · 12 March 2009, 08:57 PM

Welcome to the TG Foums.

Yes this doesn't seem right at all.
You say 5 photo pages, but how many 'photos' in all?

Maybe you can save 1 photo page as a separate .web file and email that to Xara and also attach it here for some one to take a look at?

**Scotty** · 12 March 2009, 09:55 PM

Hi,
Well I can't see any one creating a page that large and having any one stay to see it!
Not trying to offend ya in any way. But I am surprised in even uploaded.
Jim

**kitch1967** · 12 March 2009, 11:25 PM

The page isn't that large...the whole site is.
Maybe i should have saved each page separately?

**Ross Macintosh** · 12 March 2009, 11:34 PM

Are you saying your ten-page site takes up 1.5gb of space on the server? Please check and confirm.

As sledger asks - do the pages have lots and lots of photos on them? The 102mb .web file seems to suggest you've imported lots of very high resolution photos into the document. What are the typical file sizes of the photos you were importing? 65kb or 5mb each?

Regards, Ross

**Charles Moir** · 13 March 2009, 07:46 AM

Five pictures being 100 Mbytes doesn't sound right at all. It's easy to work out what it should be in total. Just add up the sizes of all your JPEGs and add a small bit for the text (a few tens of K), and that's how larger your .web file will be.

If you're loading huge RAW, PNG or TIFF files say, then yes 100Mbyts is easy to obtain - not many pictures of 25Mbytes each say are required to make 100M or more.

If you are importing RAW images or some other extremely large uncompressed format, then you're advised to use the Optimize Photo function which compresses and down-converts them to more reasonable resolution and JPEG compresses them. Check out he Photo handling chapter in the manual, I think it's covered in there.

**haakoo** · 13 March 2009, 08:02 AM

Hi,

Might I ask;is it the uploaded/exported site that has the size or is your web file that large?
If it's the uploaded/exported website,there's a thing to consider.
I think it's a flaw in the way XWD handles this.

If you create a site and use some media like pics and flash it gets imported into the yourfile_html_files folder.
But if you keep testing,all media get into this folder.
This means that if you're finally going to export/upload,
All files in this testing folder get uploaded too.
Even the ones you only used for testing but do not need in the actual upload version.

I think XWD should use a temp folder for testing and a designated one for export/upload.
This would mean it also needs a folder along the webfile for used media

Hans

**this doesn't apply on a fresh new project on first testing.
But it does if there's a folder attached after export/upload.
The project will use this folder over and over,containing every file used in the past

**steve.ledger** · 13 March 2009, 08:58 AM

I'm not following you Hans. I do a lot of testing of different photos and they do not accumulate in the index_html_files folder at all.

Example;
First test, if I bring in boat.jpg and train.jpg then export as htm to folder, I get 0.jpg and 1.jpg in the index_htm_files folder.
OK - now I delete boat.jpg and train.jpg from the page and bring in plane.jpg and car.jpg (I now have 4 photos in the bitmap gallery)
If I export this 2nd test to the same folder as the first test, 0.jpg and 1.jpg are overwritten with the plane and car picture. Nothing is accumilated.

(Which reminds me John. I have a feeling there is a way to have WD export my photos with their original name rather than 0.jpg and 1.jpg etc. Am I right?)

**covoxer** · 13 March 2009, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by sledger

I have a feeling there is a way to have WD export my photos with their original name rather than 0.jpg and 1.jpg etc. Am I right?

No, not actually. Though you can embedd external images with any file names using placeholder (Web properties dialog / Placeholder tab / Replace with graphic file). The file that you open will be copied to the files folder automatically and then uploaded with your lite. All links are maintained too.

**steve.ledger** · 13 March 2009, 09:20 AM

Yes this will be suitable untill Xara at least make changes to the way jpg is handled for export. I do not like EXIF being stripped - this must be overcome by Xara (please..)