Hi Swen, Thanks for the suggestion. That brings to mind an earlier problem I had with a different functions substituting values on large rasters, and I got around it by writing the following lines into the code:
if(raster:::.toDisk() != TRUE) { setOptions(todisk = TRUE) cat("We don't want memory problems--forcing write to disk.\n") } So I will see if that works in this case. However, I am still curious why the problem is occurring with my particular grid files, but not with the dummy rasters I made, which are in fact somewhat larger. Also, the combined size of the 9 grids is < 30 mb, which was well below my available memory (~about 500 mb free). In the meantime, I am continuing with stacks and checking whether a forced write or lower memory limits will help. Thanks again, Lyndon On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Swen Meyer <s.me...@lmu.de> wrote: > Dear Lydon, > I also had some trouble with stacking Layers in the Raster package. Try to > use a 32 bit version of R. Sounds weired but in my case the stacking with > the Raster package was much faster using the Raster Package on a 32 bit - R > Version. This is what Robert Hijmans once wrote me when I had some trouble > with the Raster Stacking: > " > Thanks that is very good to know. raster checks if the data can all be > processed in memory, and if so, does that (up to a point), for better speed. > There is a limit set by maxmemory. See > > showOptions() > > Perhaps setting maxmemory to a lower value > > e.g., > > setOptions(maxmemory=1e+08)" > > Hope this will help you. > Greetings, > Swen > > _______________________________________________ > R-sig-Geo mailing list > R-sig-Geo@r-project.org > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo _______________________________________________ R-sig-Geo mailing list R-sig-Geo@r-project.org https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo