Mon, Feb 17, 6:16 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Moderators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Feb 17 1:30 pm)



Subject: Location of Poser Temp Files


Basis3D ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 2:08 PM · edited Sat, 01 February 2025 at 5:29 AM

Right now my Poser 2010 temp files are saved on the same drive where Poser is installed. This drive has about 40 gigs of available space. I have another drive that has about 225 gigs of available space. That is the drive where all of my individual runtimes are stored.

My question is, would it be of any benefit to redirect the temp files to the drive that has more available storage space? Would this aid in faster renderings perhaps?

Also, I'm not exactly sure what this warning message means ... "Changing the temp file path will remove any files in the current temp path. This will make going back to a previous state impossible. Continue?"

I'm not exactly sure how temp files work in Poser or what I would lose in the "previous state." Would I lose anything significant by moving the temp file path to a different volume?

Thanks in advance,
dkal 

 Poser 2010 • Poser 8 • MacPro Desktop • Quad-Core Intel Xeon • 10 GB • Snow Leopard • Windows XP 


nruddock ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 3:05 PM

The temp files are previous renders (number depends on how many you've set) and depth mapped shadow images (if you're using them and you have reuse turned on).

Moving the folder won't have any affect on rendering.


Basis3D ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 3:16 PM

Okay, thanks, nruddock. Nothing too destructive then if I move the temp files. Was wondering if there's any conceivable benefit to moving them to a volume that has much greater available storage space. Must be some reason that Poser lets us change the location of the temp files, but I don't know what.

Guessing now that it probably doesn't make any difference at all if the temp files mainly only hold previous renders. Not a big deal then.

Thanks again,
dkal 

 Poser 2010 • Poser 8 • MacPro Desktop • Quad-Core Intel Xeon • 10 GB • Snow Leopard • Windows XP 


hborre ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 8:42 PM

You can always restrict the number of cachable images under General Preferences.  The default is 100; bringing that number down to a manageable digit should save you some space.  Don't set it to zero, though.  I understand Poser has a fit with that value.


Basis3D ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 9:21 PM

Really? Very good to know, hborre. Thanks! Right now I have it set at 10. Am trying to figure out what to set the number of threads to and whether or not to check Separate Process.

The description of my processor reads as follows...

2 x 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon

So I guess that means that its a dual quad. So do you think I should set threads to 16 and check the box for Separate Threads?

 Poser 2010 • Poser 8 • MacPro Desktop • Quad-Core Intel Xeon • 10 GB • Snow Leopard • Windows XP 


Basis3D ( ) posted Fri, 07 January 2011 at 9:23 PM

I meant to say "set the threads to EIGHT and check the box for Separate Threads?"

dkal

 Poser 2010 • Poser 8 • MacPro Desktop • Quad-Core Intel Xeon • 10 GB • Snow Leopard • Windows XP 


Dizzi ( ) posted Sat, 08 January 2011 at 9:14 AM

The temp folder does not contain the previously rendered images. They're stored in the user settings folder.

Firefly (at least Poser 8+) converts all textures to exr format and puts them into the temp folder before starting to render. So having the temp folder on the same drive as the runtimes could slow down the conversion process.



Basis3D ( ) posted Sat, 08 January 2011 at 9:56 AM

Oh! Thanks, Dizzi.

If that's the case then I guess it would be better to keep the Temp Files on the same drive that has Poser 2010 (where the Temp Files are now located) instead of moving the Temp File path to the drive that has the individual runtimes.

I do have one other available drive that has neither Poser 2010 nor the individual runtimes. Do you see any benefit to redirecting the Temp File path to that volume, Dizzi?

Thanks!

 Poser 2010 • Poser 8 • MacPro Desktop • Quad-Core Intel Xeon • 10 GB • Snow Leopard • Windows XP 


MyCat ( ) posted Sat, 08 January 2011 at 10:23 PM

I'm not Dizzi, but spreading the bandwidth over as many physical disks as possible seems prudent. Just don't partition a disk into more than one logical drive and then spread the I/O over those.


Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.