64-bit library limited to 4GB?

Question

I'm using an image manipulation library that throws an exception when I attempt to load images > 4GB in size. It claims to be 64bit, but wouldn't a 64bit library allow loading images larger than that? I think they recompiled their C libraries using a 64 bit memory model/compiler but still used unsigned integers and failed upgrade to use 64 bit types.

Is that a reasonable conclusion?

Edit - As an after-thought can OS memory become so fragemented that allocation of large chunks is no longer possible? (It doesn't work right after a reboot either, but just wondering.) What about under .NET? Can the .NET managed memory become so fragmented that allocation of large chunks fails?

Answer 1

It's a reasonable suggestion, however the exact cause could be a number of things - for example what OS are you running, how much RAM / swap do you have? The application/OS may not over-commit virtual memory so you'll need 4GB (or more) of free RAM to open the image.

Out of interest does it seem to be a definite stop at the 4GB boundary - i.e. does a 3.99GB image succeed, but a 4GB one fail - you say it does which would suggest a definite use of a 32bit size in the libraries data structures.

Update

With regards your second question - not really. Pretty much all modern OS's use virtual memory, so each process gets it's own contiguous address space. A single contiguous region in a processes' address space doesn't need to be backed by contiguous physical RAM, it can be made up of a number of separate physical areas of RAM made to look like they are contiguous; so the OS doesn't need to have a single 4GB chunk of RAM free to give your application a 4GB chunk.

It's possible that an application could fragment it's virtual address space such that there isn't room for a contiguous 4GB region, but considering the size of a 64-bit address space it's probably highly unlikely in your scenario.

Answer 2

Yes, unless perhaps the binary file format itself limits the size of images.

Answer 3

To answer your follow up, I recently read this article and found it interesting.

And yes, .NET can have problems with memory fragmentation.