Brian Doney

No, you absolutely were not promised compatibility, with every addon, at every single slider setting available. Of course you weren't. In fact, you were explicitly warned otherwise, if you'd been listening. To the point though, that's not what this thread is about. I agree with you that 64bit is required, but that isn't the reality of the situation today. So you (collective you) can either learn to compromise for that like an adult, like any adult that realized this would be the case since before release of 2.0. Or you (collective you) can continue your temper tantrums of entitlement. Either way, this thread is about: Version 2.1 OOM and possible memory leak. and not 64 bit. We've already done 64 bit to death. I would be the delusional one, were I to believe your "luck" theory over actual testing I have done first hand. I don't necessarily think you or anyone is lying, but even Jeroen went through this with the 2.0 release, where initially he refused to accept that his addons could be the cause of his issues. How'd that turn out ? In fact, I think he's still using that Cessna. In any case, if there is a leak, you should easily be able to provide me with a situation where I can re-create it. I'm waiting. EDIT: I am going to go ahead and wrap up my participation in this thread. We have passed the conversation stage, and are now in the denial and arguing with evidence while providing none stage, that I have no interest in being a part of. If anyone, after all of this, isn't at least willing to question other causes, then nothing else I say will matter anyway, and I'll not be wasting any more of my time responding to pure conjecture. If anyone does want to continue discussing this rationally, well, show your testing first, and we'll go from there.

Honestly, at this stage, if you just want to fly without hassle, FSX is the better choice. Otherwise, if you want to involve yourself a bit in the evolution of what P3Dv2 hopefully will become, and are willing to go over a few bumps along the way, P3Dv2 can be very rewarding. It really isn't an easy recommendation to make. In 6 months or so, hopefully it will be a bit more clear, one way or the other. As far as licensing, we don't really like to get into that here, as it's really the kind of thing that is between you and LM. Sorry I can't offer anything more there.

Well, maybe it is the Raptor then, I don't know. It's getting a bit late tonight, so I will try it tomorrow if I have some time. I feel that it doesn't really matter though, as at such high settings, I'd expect to be on the edge. If you eventually settled at 100 MB free, but it did eventually settle, then that still isn't a leak, just a sign that settings will need to be compromised. The fix ? Lower the slider I was just messing around again, and the number of objects is staggering at full right sliders. I'd only briefly tried it there right after release of 2.0, and only to slew around a bit. This was the first time that I'd actually tried flying with it set so high. I guess I just don't understand why this is such a mystery. LM have given us the options to fully break the engine if we adjust these options carelessly. YAY A CAR ANALOGY ! It's like LM brought us a restored Charger, that they'd added some shiny bits too, with the clear instructions that we could do one of two things*: 1) Go fast. 2) Turn corners. ...but never both at the same time. From my perspective, half of the sim community have gone careening off the road at the first bend, and are trying to blame the car ! :lol: Anyway, have a good night, I'll try to break it some more tomorrow. *not unlike most American cars :lol:

I'm not positive if this would be related, but LM have also mentioned that a reload is often required after making changes in the menus. Not really sure, and I don't claim that this is definitely the case here. If we look at the differences, I did fly the Beech, you were in the Raptor. It might be that the speed factor comes into play there, but that somewhat supports the idea behind having different graphics profiles for different types of flying. LM did not go into this much detail, but my impression from what they have said, is that it is entirely possible to overload the engine using sliders and default scenery alone, and that it is up to us to work to find balance between LOD radius and autogen density for the type of flying we will do. It may very well be that with an advanced addon aircraft, Extremely Dense might always be 100% off limits. That's not really a surprise to me, as the number of objects is really quite over the top over such a large area, in my opinion. If someone wants to disregard LM's advice and use high LOD and autogen settings together, well, in that case I think that the only thing that might need fixing are the options made available to us. For full disclosure, I flew that test at an LOD of 4.5. Had I run 6.5 I have no doubt I would have had an OOM, but, I wouldn't do that, since I have already been warned not to. Were I to have been in an advanced addon aircraft, I likely would have had an OOM as well. I think the difference of opinion we are having is, that this makes perfect sense to me, and is simply a compromise that must be made as long as we are working with 32bit. I hope if nothing else, that I have at least shown that there is likely not a leak. I guess, in the end, that was my point from the beginning. If your addon a/c is incompatible or chews up 1GB of VAS all by itself, or if you are running settings above what has been recommended ( or all of the above, as I feel is likely in most of these reports ), how can the resulting OOM be considered a bug ? Or even a surprise ?

Well that's really a shame. I agree, that less than 1 GB of VAS is low, and that's why I don't run Extremely Dense, or if I did, I would follow LM's advice and keep LOD radius in check. I guess you are correct, you have proven that higher settings result in lower available VAS, but the point is, it will stabilize, which I have proven. The headshot is in post #133, where a properly working system returned VAS as I flew out over the water and left the autogen behind. If LM has made any mistake, it is in allowing for such high autogen and LOD settings to be use simultaneously. I'm sorry if I frustrated you, and I hope you realize my comments made in frustration were absolutely not directed at you. I'd hoped we could look further since I do trust you are running a stock sim. I hope you will reconsider.

What about a situation where you have dependencies between XML gauges ? A situation where one bit is waiting for the other bit to write but it never does as it doesn't parse ? Am I talking out of my nether regions again ?

Well, I apologize for letting a bit of my frustration show, but this is exactly what I alluded to earlier, and is also what happened last time I did extended tests of P3D. It's never enough to just show something can be done. There are always 100 caveats, and the more conclusive your evidence, the more hand-waving occurs. I'll consider this test concluded from my point of view. If someone comes up with a better scenario, I'm open to it. I'd like to talk with Jim more to compare notes, as I do believe he is the only other person testing bone stock.

You can dislike my comments all you want, but I am putting my money where my mouth is. I don't believe in "luck" when it comes to software. Once again, we'll just move the goalposts since that's easier than confronting the actual evidence being presented. Lucky...are you kidding me ? EDIT; I just want to add, I want to see what the issue here is too. This is the most boring thing I've done in months, but I am doing it for a reason. Just handwaving away the fact that I am running max veg and nowhere near an OOM after 2 hours isn't cool. Let's do away with the dislikes and other such and try to figure it out. Or you can return to insisting this issue is something that it quite obviously isn't. That's up to you.

We talked about LOD vs autogen earlier, and during release of 2.0. Someone else may feel like searching for the exact comments, but LM explicitly warned against high LOD with high autogen settings. I was thinking about crossing the lake, that would be an area clear of autogen right ? So if things were working properly, I should see a nice big jump in VAS ? Well guess what: Taken just now. This isn't a leak. This is people running incompatible addons, or a combination of settings that have been warned against from the start. However, I will keep going. Let me get back over land, in the thick of the autogen, and I'd be glad to.

By timestamp of the first screenshot we are 1 hour and 16 minutes in, and nowhere near an OOM. As expected, I did lose a rather large chunk as night fell, maybe as it loaded night textures for the surrounding airfields. That's my guess anyway. As it gets darker I may switch to external shots to get a better view of AG density, not sure what would be acceptable to you guys. EDIT: I did climb to 3K as I was getting a bit close to the treetops for unattended flying.

Jim, I am flying max veg for over an hour now.

I am running Extremely Dense Vegetation BTW ^ Before it gets too dark: So.....yeah.... I'm gonna go grab some dinner.

See, that's just it, no, I'm really not. We're at the 50 minute mark and I'm at 734304. In fact, that I see free VAS climbing as much as falling, is enough for me, but I will continue on. I'll probably lose a big chunk here in a bit as night falls Next update at 1 HR

30 minute check in, Note- I did change heading as otherwise I would have had to cross a lake, and that just wouldn't do. I'll try to keep the clock in view for any further shots. Been hanging in the 740XXX to 750XXX range for at least 10 minutes. Also, Jeroen brought up a good point about the view panning, so about every 2 minutes or so I do a full pan of the view.

I am flying northwest-ish into Canada from my startup in Pennsylvania :lol: I gave the Beech full fuel before I left. If that isn't enough then I give up :lol: Stabilized at 961472 VAS AVAIL after about 15 minutes, actually see it climbing a bit right now.

Let's see what happens:

Do we know if the Raptor was updated/how much does it rely on XML/etc ? I am open to test any scenario, and will re-read your post and try to test as close to your scenario as I can.

Understood. I just wasn't sure if this was something you were/are aware of. I will make a genuine effort to re-create this on my end. I'll go so far as to say, if you will provide me with a scenario, I will test it as closely as I can to how you are set up. Full disclosure, I do not have ANY scenery addons installed, and will test in a non-XML based aircraft.

In this case, I will take your word for it. Pardon me for being impatient with your suggestions. Maybe someone that might actually fly the sim that way can do the testing this time.

I have to ask, am I the only one that remembers LM talking about how they opened up the sliders quite a bit over FSX/1.4, and that the entire point of the profile system was to allow us to choose between high AG or high LOD or w/e, based on the type of flight ? That maxing both together would assuredly result in a bad time ?

This is kind of why I might avoid going any further, as just like last time, the goal posts are constantly being shifted. Now I have to fly at 5000 ft for 13 hours, 13 hours wasn't enough on it's own. There very well could be a bug. I really feel like I've said the same about 40 times just in this thread alone ? So if I were to fly this 5000ft long haul, what will be the next goal post ? Wouldn't this all be much easier if we ruled out addon compatibility first ?

If you don't mind me asking, what AG and LOD settings are you running ? I don't run high AG as I prefer a higher LOD. This is something LM commented on before release, that while they provided us options to increase both, that we would certainly have to choose between them. This was the entire point of the new profile system. I'm wondering if some aren't trying to have their cake and eat it too. I might test this tonight. It may very well be a bug. My personal experience so far says otherwise, though, as I've yet to have a single OOM with P3Dv2.

770 would likely run out of gas before it could make use of all 4GB. Not too mention, a 770 is really just a 680, if you're gonna upgrade, surely you'd want to aim higher than that.

See that's just it though, I have never said that there are no issues with P3D. Never. Not once. I even reported an issue after doing everything I could to narrow it down. I only mean to say that if P3Dv2 is as unusable as some claim, how did I make it through yet another long haul with mid to high settings across the board ? That's it. That is my only question for today. No disrespect to anyone intended.

I've read those reports sure. But I've also read a number of threads where it wasn't until 10 posts later that we finally read "Oh well of course I had X installed, I can't be without it". Members here have been disingenuous enough about that to the point that I take any "no-addons at all" claim with a huge grain of salt. No one ever wants to admit it could be their Favorite Thing causing a problem. So I don't know. Maybe ( ? ) there is an issue with higher autogen settings ? I don't know, but I will give it a shot on another overnight trip. Finally, I already said that P3D needs some work, I've never said otherwise, ever since the initial release. It just seems that way too often, people will do everything they can to exacerbate the issue, and then point and yell. It isn't helpful, and more often than not, it makes it even harder to find the root cause of some of these things. The only other explanation is that my PC is made of pure magic. All due respect, seriously, but I think we are speaking to entirely different points. I was speaking as to how I was able to make such a long flight, because I'm simply not doing any of the things I mentioned. Nothing more, nothing less. Other than the potential issue with higher AG settings, which I admittedly haven't tested, what is more likely ? That whatever number of addons are causing problems ? Or that via pure magic I was able to fly for 13 hours OOM free ? That's really all I am saying, and it is the same things I was saying 2 months ago when I was flying cross country without issue. I notice a pattern. I'm sorry that offends so many.