Elvas Tower: Significant differences between SVN builds and automatic builds? - Elvas Tower

Jump to content

  • 7 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Significant differences between SVN builds and automatic builds? Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 10 April 2014 - 02:41 AM

I'm getting this crash https://bugs.launchp...or/+bug/1305165 when running an automatic build downloaded from James' site. If I instead run the executable downloaded from SVN (or rebuilt by myself) I don't get the bug. A process concurrency problem? Problem is, that this way investigating the bug is quite a hard task for me.

#2 User is offline   dennisat 

  • Conductor
  • Group: Status: Contributing Member
  • Posts: 474
  • Joined: 16-February 13
  • Gender:Male
  • Simulator:Open Rails & MSTS
  • Country:

Posted 10 April 2014 - 03:54 AM

I have had this crash recently but didn't look into it too closely because the next day I downloaded a new version from the SVN, rebuilt it, and so far the problem has not recurred. I assumed the problem had been fixed in (or before) the version I downloaded. Needless to say, I've forgotten the relevant version numbers.

Dennis

#3 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 10 April 2014 - 04:13 AM

As I've said previously, the two are built differently and will necessarily cause different timings. My builds, being "release", are much more representative because it'll be what all releases to the public actually are. There will also be differences between running the Subversion builds and running the code under a debugger. But, if you want to debug a release-only bug, switch Visual Studio to release mode, rebuild everything, run the program without debugging and then attach the debugger when it crashes.

#4 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 10 April 2014 - 09:57 AM

Hi James, can you pls. explain me how I do "attach the debugger" after having run the release mode of the OR pack and having got the crash dialog box?

#5 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 01:41 AM

OK, I found what I think causes the problem. In my analysis it should not be a thread safety problem, and by the way it happens always on the same sequenceMaterial list (made by 4 objects).
Here is a working patch Attached File  RenderFrame.cs.patch.zip (388bytes)
Number of downloads: 347
As can be seen, I had to remove the sorting adjustment based on the sorting index.
On the Internet I also found this post http://www.pcreview....u-t2605541.html about the exception, where it is written that a report was sent to MS about it (by the way, maybe casually, the non-working study case created there has also 4 objects...)

So, if it is necessary to differentiate primitives with almost same or same location, I would ask to find another way to do it. If I am completely wrong, excuse me.

#6 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 12:37 PM

View PostCsantucci, on 12 April 2014 - 01:41 AM, said:

OK, I found what I think causes the problem. In my analysis it should not be a thread safety problem, and by the way it happens always on the same sequenceMaterial list (made by 4 objects).


This is not acceptable because we must sort similarly positioned objects correctly. If they do not have reasonable sort indexes, that should be fixed, but their use is not to be removed.

#7 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 01:07 PM

James,
I don't understand what is not acceptable. Have you read the discussion I have linked? Why things work when in debug mode? Why should the sort indexes be unreasonable?

#8 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 01:17 PM

View PostCsantucci, on 12 April 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

I don't understand what is not acceptable. The problem seems to arise not from not reasonable sort indexes, but from the questionable way used to artificially distantiate objects using sort indexes. Eliminating such way solves the problem (I hope it does not create other ones).


If the sort indexes are reasonable, there will be no problem. So you must be experiencing unreasonable sort indexes - fix that, not that fact that they are used to influence the sort, which is required for models to render correctly.

#9 User is offline   Csantucci 

  • Member, Board of Directors
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 6,986
  • Joined: 31-December 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 01:21 PM

Have you read the discussion I have linked? Why do things work in debug mode?

#10 User is offline   James Ross 

  • Open Rails Developer
  • Group: Status: Elite Member
  • Posts: 5,488
  • Joined: 30-June 10
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Simulator:Open Rails
  • Country:

Posted 12 April 2014 - 01:28 PM

View PostCsantucci, on 12 April 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

Have you read the discussion I have linked? Why do things work in debug mode?


If you'd read the discussion you linked, you'd see that someone identified a possible cause being a threading issues. That, among other possible reasons, is why different environments experience different results.

I am literally out of care for this now; either you work out what the problem with the sort indexes is or you work on something else. I am sick and tired of people thinking that e.g. linking to a strange and unclear thread on another forum somehow validates their theory instead of actually providing facts and evidence.

The sort cannot fail unless the data provided to it is wrong. Figure out why the data provided is wrong.

  • 7 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users