The data type supported by “dim” is a positive integer scalar.
The data type for this input is the same as for “a.”ĭim: This input sets the dimension on which the max() function will operate. In cases where max() is sent with an additional array, it must have dimensions compatible with “a”. The type of data supported by this input is scalar, vector, matrix, or multidimensional array.ī: Additional input matrix. We will show you the different modes this function has to get the maximum values in the following examples.īelow we will detail each of the arguments and input flags of the max() function:Ī: This input specifies the input scalar, vector, or matrix. The data types supported by max() are single, double, int8, int16, int32, int64, uint8, uint16, uint32, uint64, logical, categorical, datetime, and duration. The types of input arguments accepted by this function are scalars, vectors, matrices, and multidimensional arrays. When the function is called, these modes are selected by flags, size and dimension vectors. Max() has different modes for processing input and output data. This function can also return the index of the maximum values sent in “a” and returned in “r”. The max() function returns in “r” the maximum value among all elements of the array “a”. I don't really know if that will help, but it's an idea.=max (a,, _, ‘linear’ ) MATLAB max() description and examples (NB: overall that's more memory, but fragmentation wouldn't be so problematic). Then all the elements of the cells could be stored wherever, each needing only 10K of contiguous space. So if each row of your array was a cell, you'd need space for a 25920-by-1 cell array, which I think would be about 1.5Mb of contiguous space. IANA developer, so don't take this as gospel, but I do know that cell arrays have some memory overhead, but they effectively act like an array of pointers to other memory locations.
If the issue is, for whatever reason, the maximum single array size, rather than the overall memory, you might be able to store the data as a cell array, then just access everything with indexing (and probably lots of nasty loops). but actually Walter's suggestion does bring up another possibility (dirty, but maybe effective). I was thinking of avoiding that route because it would make the memory problem worse when you do cell2mat. Is there any way you can get some kind of likely upper bound on the number of rows? If you can, and it will fit into memory, I think you'd be better off preallocating, then deleting unused rows afterward. I don't know the underlying details of how that's done, but it's possible that that's causing some of your pain. When an array is increased in size and runs out of space in its current memory location, it has to be copied somewhere with enough room. As you may know, MATLAB requires arrays to be stored in contiguous memory blocks, which is why the first line from the memory command gives the largest possible array (which is smaller than the total available). Now, the lack of preallocation of space may be causing some of the problem. One thing I was trying to establish is whether you're reading data from a source or creating it in some way. OK, so I assume you're filling the array inside some kind of loop (presumably a while loop) in which you're doing.
0 kommentar(er)
