hi,
as discussed with tim on irc. here comes a quick fix for memory-hungry tile
manager. due to bugs in FGNewCache old tiles where never deleted.
i left the timestamp-updates in the cull-traversal. but imho things work just
as well when timestamps are updated in FGNewCache::insert_tile() and
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:11 AM, till busch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
as discussed with tim on irc. here comes a quick fix for memory-hungry
tile
manager. due to bugs in FGNewCache old tiles where never deleted.
i left the timestamp-updates in the cull-traversal. but imho things work
hi curt,
1. this is a really small patch.
please read the code before posting funny questions.
2. besides of the missing min_index the logic for finding the oldest tile was
plain wrong. notice the comparison operator was wrong? (and in the same
manner max_time=0 was wrong) for those who do not
I was looking through some of the recent code changes for newcache.cxx and I
see that the time stamping has seen substantial changes though several
revisions and probably does not resemble the plib code any more ... I based
my questions on the contents of your patch not realizing the file had seen
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 1:51 PM, till busch wrote:
hi curt,
sorry for being rude. your asking (though not specific enough, imho) had a
valid point as andy pointed out (in irc). the variable naming was bad.
apparently in the transition from plib the wrong branch of the condition
got
in.
hi curt,
sorry for being rude. your asking (though not specific enough, imho) had a
valid point as andy pointed out (in irc). the variable naming was bad.
apparently in the transition from plib the wrong branch of the condition got
in. this patch now fixes the variable names. (and adds
hi curt,
i fear i'm not the right person to answer this. (at least not without doing
some time-consuming research).
i don't *believe* the problem you describe could be related to the deletion of
old tiles. what i can tell for sure is that the correct tiles get deleted. i
had lots of debugging
Hi Til,
Thanks again for your efforts on this (and to everyone else who
participated.) I've just committed the most recent version of this patch.
It seemed to stand up well to my stress tests. There is an issue with the
ground-cache code not always returning a proper hit, but that seems
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Curtis Olson wrote:
| Hi Til,
|
| Thanks again for your efforts on this (and to everyone else who
| participated.) I've just committed the most recent version of this
| patch. It seemed to stand up well to my stress tests. There is an
| issue with
9 matches
Mail list logo
