Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-22 Thread Viechtbauer Wolfgang (STAT)
Subject: Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size > Fantastic. You're much more likely to get a response now. Best of > luck. > > "werner w" wrote in message > news:1264175935970-1100164.p...@n4.nabble.com... >> >> Thanks Matthew, you a

Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-22 Thread Matthew Dowle
Fantastic. You're much more likely to get a response now. Best of luck. "werner w" wrote in message news:1264175935970-1100164.p...@n4.nabble.com... > > Thanks Matthew, you are absolutely right. > > I am working on Windows XP SP2 32bit with R versions 2.9.1. > > Here is an example: > d <- as.d

Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-22 Thread werner w
Thanks Matthew, you are absolutely right. I am working on Windows XP SP2 32bit with R versions 2.9.1. Here is an example: d <- as.data.frame(matrix(trunc(rnorm(6*27136, 1, 100)),ncol=6)) d[,4:5] <- trunc(100*runif(2*27136, 0, 1)) d[,6] <- trunc(1000*runif(27136, 0, 1)) for (i in 4:6)

Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-22 Thread Steve Lianoglou
Hi Werner, On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Werner W. wrote: > Hi, > > I have browsed the help list and looked at the FAQ but I don't find > conclusive evidence if this is normal or I am doing something wrong. > I am running a lm() on a data.frame with 27136 observations of 6 variables (3 > num

Re: [R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-22 Thread Matthew Dowle
Please re-read the posting guide e.g. you didn't provide an example data set or a way to generate one, or any R version information. "Werner W." wrote in message news:646146.32238...@web23002.mail.ird.yahoo.com... > Hi, > > I have browsed the help list and looked at the FAQ but I don't find >

[R] Once again: Error: cannot allocate vector of size

2010-01-21 Thread Werner W.
Hi, I have browsed the help list and looked at the FAQ but I don't find conclusive evidence if this is normal or I am doing something wrong. I am running a lm() on a data.frame with 27136 observations of 6 variables (3 num and 3 factor). After a while R throws this: > lm(log(y) ~ log(a) + log(