VLC Using Massive Amounts of Memory

[FredNurk]

Just a few minutes after starting VLC 2.0.8 running on Windows XP it uses up massive amounts of memory until it freezes and my disc is rattling away, probably something to do with the page file. By that time, nearly all my 4 GB of memory is used up.

So why should VLC start to do this? It has been working perfectly for months.
The same .mvk file play OK using Windows Media Player.
Old .mkv files that I had previously played without noticing any problems, now do the same - massive amounts of memory being held on to by VLC.

I just installed the latest version - 2.1.0 - and it doesn't do that.

So what happened?
Someone must know why v 2.0.8 steadily uses up memory, as if it reads the .mkv file but never releases the data.

I haven't done any XP updates recently so it can't be that.
I have done a Java update, but don't see why that should affect VLC.

Anyone have any insight into this?

[Lotesdelere]

Stick to v2.1.0 as it has many fixes for MKV files.

[FredNurk]

OK, my bad! Version 2.1.0 of VLC also uses up massive amounts of RAM when playing .mkv files.

If I play the .mkv file while I have my other usual programmes running, such as Firefox, Sunbird and Vuze, the amount of memory used up by VLC causes my PC to lock up. VLC itself stops dead. If VLC could dump the memory it doesn't need a little sooner, I don't think my PC would have any problems. I have only 4 GB of RAM installed in my Windows XP system.

So I have to exit my other programmes in order for VLC to have enough memory to run without freezing. This appears to be because VLC dumps the memory it doesn't need before it exhausts the available memory.

The first image below is from SysInternals' "Process Explorer" showing "Memory Usage" while playing the .mkv file (any .mkv file).
The second image below shows memory usage while playing the same .mkv file using Windows Media Player - the first half of the second image shows the saw-tooth patten of VLC's memory usage. The second half shows WMP's usage, which appears to be zero.

So what's going on, chaps?

[FredNurk]

* bump *

No one interested?

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

Try to change your video output to a different one.