| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 66510 | 2006-02-25 21:29:00 | MSWord200 doc. failure to save | F.W.J.M. (3610) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 433930 | 2006-02-25 21:29:00 | I have a 543MB text and photo document which I have been working on for a considerable time. The document is virtually complete except for editing and some re formatting. While the document can be opened and closed if no changes are made if changes are made the document will not save. Auto save is on. I get the followin Desk Top mesages 1. Saving the Auto recovery file is posponed for......... 2. The save failed dueto out of memory or disk space. I have 512Mb of RAM and Giga bytes of disk space available. I have a similar 900MB document in the same situation. All other word documents work normally F.W.J.M. |
F.W.J.M. (3610) | ||
| 433931 | 2006-02-25 21:47:00 | Your document size is so far above any recommended size, I am amazed it has even allowed you to get that far. Word 2000 has limits on the RAM it will use, it will not even use all of the 512 MB, you need Office 2003 to get that ability. Personally I would never let a Word document exceed 32 MB as data corruption then becomes inevitable Microsoft have a file size limit for Word of 32 MB for the text portion, with graphics adding to that. In my experience its unsafe to go much above that even with the graphics due to inevitable problems. There are work-arounds, the photos (which will be the main cause of the bloated size) should be inserted as a link, in which case they are not actually embedded in the document until it is viewed. I would recommend that as a starting point. Also compressing the photos (from the menu when you right click an image and select format image) will help, but at 500 and 900 MB you are so far above a reliably useable document I doubt that compressing will bring it back. The other recommended method is to produce the tome in chapters, each as a separate file but that becomes a problem if a table of contents or bookmarks are used. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 433932 | 2006-02-25 22:11:00 | wow man, that's 2 humungous docs you've got there! what size are the photos (in kb's or mb's) you're not inserting 2 or 3Mb or larger pics are you? are they jpeg, tiff, bmp? wee bit of info here ciencia.silvert.org about shrinking word docs, but nothing on the scale you have! |
bartsdadhomer (80) | ||
| 433933 | 2006-02-26 18:01:00 | I wrote up a specific reply and then closed the window. So, here's my generic article, which has very similar information anyway. www.officearticles.com t_word.htm |
Dreamboat (9170) | ||
| 433934 | 2006-02-26 18:13:00 | Before you blow it completely, copy and paste it into four or five separate documents, more if you need to, and take not of Godfathers advice re his 32MB limit for the future. though doing that would. As soon as you have broken it up, make a further set of backup copies. If you don't you run the risk of losing it all. Cheers Billy 8-{) |
Billy T (70) | ||
| 433935 | 2006-02-28 03:41:00 | Thank you God Father and the others who replied to my frequest. It may interest you that I have successfylly dealt with a 104 MB document in all its phases. using XP Pro and Windows 2000. I would like to know what differance Office 2003 would make. Is there an alternative word programme which can cope with very large MB documents? Meantime I will break the current document into workable chapters. Thanks All F.W.J.M |
F.W.J.M. (3610) | ||
| 433936 | 2006-02-28 04:02:00 | Office 2003 will not help with documents of that size, it will enable the PC to use more resources to handle them faster though. I have no doubt you have managed documents of that size, what I am concerned about is that the probablility of document corruption is extreme at that size. You are working well outside the recommended parameters for the program. Take care and rename the document often, so you have uncorrupted copies to return to should the worst happen. I am unaware of any word processor that would handle such large documents, however the only reason they will be so large is the embedded images, which could be eliminated if they were linked instead of embeded. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 433937 | 2006-02-28 04:26:00 | Just WOW! :waughh: I had a log file once got to 1.2gb, LOL, couldnt open it! |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 433938 | 2006-02-28 04:30:00 | Oh, I was unaware the file size limit of word docs was 32mb?, that doesnt seem right! or is that your own preference? I have users at work that may need some of those caps shown to them. Big presentation docs, generally graphic image density reduction does help as you suggest. Wow, 512mb file! A link would be useful.... |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 433939 | 2006-02-28 04:50:00 | Huge files are never a good idea. Working on them will be slow. There's always the problem that the error statistics will bite you. As a rough guide to what we are talking about, average sized books are about 100 kB. I've downloaded quite a few books from the Gutenberg project, and have put quite a few on a floppy. :D I suppose 100 kB of text would be bloated quite a bit with the Word formatting overhead, but even 32 MB would be enormous. Separate out the pictures. You won't be editing them with Word, so why carry that huge load? |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||