Jose Almeida Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 Dear Frank, I had another one of those crashes; it only happens occasionaly. Attached are 3 files that may help you pinpoint the problem. José MAXX_METAR.rwx METAR.rwx Log.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 (edited) Frank, Tha last lines in log.txt are: SkyMaxx Pro: Found new METAR.rwx file SkyMaxx Pro: Parsing METAR data SkyMaxx Pro: METAR parsing took 649 ms. --=={This application has crashed because of the plugin: Real Weather Connector}==-- Since I had RWC set to "Always", why is it looking for METAR.rwx and not MAXX_METAR.rwx? José Edited July 1, 2016 by Jose Almeida Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundog Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 Thanks; I spent a couple of hours trying to figure out what happened there. Taken at face value, the log implies that parsing your METAR data somehow resulted in memory corruption and a subsequent crash. However I haven't been able to reproduce it, even after carefully testing the parsing of the METAR.rwx file you provided and looking for memory errors. To get a little bit technical, I think the crash actually happened while Real Weather Connector was trying to send a message to SkyMaxx Pro via X-Plane's built-in messaging system for plugins. So, this implies that something corrupted the shared memory that X-Plane uses for plugins to communicate with each other. The last time I saw something like this, it was due to an old version of SASL that was overwriting memory. They later released a new version of SASL that cleared it up. But you don't seem to be using SASL. You are, however, using a lot of other add-ons, some of which I haven't seen before. I think one of them is corrupting memory and leading to this sporadic crash you're getting. So, to make a long story short: make sure you have the latest versions of all of your add-ons installed. Are you using the latest XSB for example? And if there are unusual add-ons that you don't really need, try removing them. > Since I had RWC set to "Always", why is it looking for METAR.rwx and not MAXX_METAR.rwx? It reads whichever file was updated most recently, regardless of your setting. "Always" just means we download our own copy of METAR.rwx (named MAXX_METAR.rwx) to fall back on, in case X-Plane's built-in one isn't getting updated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 (edited) 10 minutes ago, sundog said: > Since I had RWC set to "Always", why is it looking for METAR.rwx and not MAXX_METAR.rwx? It reads whichever file was updated most recently, regardless of your setting. "Always" just means we download our own copy of METAR.rwx (named MAXX_METAR.rwx) to fall back on, in case X-Plane's built-in one isn't getting updated. Hi Cameron, This is contradictory to what Frank wrote a few days ago in another thread: "When RWC is in "always" mode, it downloads its own maxx_metar.rwx file (or something similarly named - I'm the road and can't check specifically) and ignores the metar.rwx file provided by X-Plane and/or the NOAA plugin. " It also raises another problem since the METAR.rwx is newer than the MAXX_METAR.rwx (2016/07/01 13:45 and 2016/07/01 11:45, respectively) and the former does not have the airport I was leaving from, LPPD. EDIT: I addressed this one to Cameron but it was indeed a reply to Frank; sorry for that. Edited July 1, 2016 by Jose Almeida Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundog Posted July 1, 2016 Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 I oversimplified things a bit previously (usually people use 'always' in situations where the default METAR data isn't being updated at all.) I don't use the NOAA plugin myself, but if it has an option to disable writing the metar.rwx file that may be what you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 1, 2016 There is no option to turn off metar and indeed NOAA uses metar data to make the wind transition from winds aloft to winds at the airport. Until x-plane 10.50 comes along, NOAA is a must for me, which leaves me just the option between living with occasional crashes and disabling RWC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundog Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Jose, as I explained earlier, I don't think your occasional crashes are actually caused by RWC: " So, to make a long story short: make sure you have the latest versions of all of your add-ons installed. Are you using the latest XSB for example? And if there are unusual add-ons that you don't really need, try removing them. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 Frank, I am using the latest version of Xivap, not XSB, and I wouldn't like to dispense with any of the plugins I am currently using; they are there for a purpose and I will be glad to explain why I think they are so useful but this is hardly the place. I may have found why there was an incomplete metar file, which did not cover the particular airport I was departing from; this may have been caused by my temporarily disabling NOAA, which may have caused the metar to be incomplete. However, if you say this wouldn't cause an RWC crash I have to accept your word. I hope I can stop using NOAA once x-plane 10.50 becomes final, since it will provide wind and turbulence aloft globally; incidentally, the code for that has been partially authored by Joan, the designer of NOAA plugin. José Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2016 Frank, It is still happening, in spite of me running xplane 10.50b7 with real weather and all NOAA plugin files having been moved to a backup directory; log.txt file is attached and it is similar to the previous ones. Log_4.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundog Posted July 22, 2016 Report Share Posted July 22, 2016 Your log does look like SkyMaxx Pro crashed due to unexpected METAR data. There was an incident a few days ago where NOAA was publishing data that crashed SMP for a couple of hours, so I wonder if you still had a copy of that in your X-Plane folder. Try deleting your METAR.rwx and/or MAXX_METAR.rwx files before starting, to ensure new data gets downloaded. Does that help? (We do have a patch to prevent this from re-occurring that we'll be distributing soon.) I just checked and SMP seems OK with the data that's being published currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2016 I'll PM you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsnapp Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 Will a patch be release this week? Bad metar data yesterday was causing repeated crashes will trying to stream online! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hades_esp Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 (edited) Hi! To me, i can say, that, yesterday, with RWC disabled SMP with/without NOAA plugin, All ok. With RWC enabled and "Always" option checked, CTD. Edited August 1, 2016 by hades_esp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Almeida Posted August 1, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 If you guys go on posting about this I'm sure Cameron will lock the thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsnapp Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 Shame on Cameron then for locking a topical thread. I received a message from sundog saying that they have passed on a patch to X-Aviation, so one would hope it would be forthcoming very very quickly. In this kind of situation I feel existing users should be kept proactively in the loop, not locked out of commenting just because Cameron et al don't desire to hear more about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 Shame on Cameron then for locking a topical thread. I received a message from sundog saying that they have passed on a patch to X-Aviation, so one would hope it would be forthcoming very very quickly. In this kind of situation I feel existing users should be kept proactively in the loop, not locked out of commenting just because Cameron et al don't desire to hear more about it. Pounding a topic with the same issue in a span of an hour is not necessary. Relax yourself. And, if you read what I had said as the last word in the topic, it's clear as mud we felt we had an idea and a patch forthcoming for it. Shame on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsnapp Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 Just now, Cameron said: Pounding a topic with the same issue in a span of an hour is not necessary. Relax yourself. I did not "pound" nor even do anything within the "span of an hour". Lets be fact based. :-) I will not even point out that this "pounded" topic has a mere 16 easily read through posts in it. Which would indicate that it is hardly the case that this thread is overwhelming to the server, to the eye, or the mind. In the time it took you to post that, you could have for example given a rough estimate for when the patch X-Aviation has been supplied from Sundog might be available for users. I think that would be more constructive to the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 I did not "pound" nor even do anything within the "span of an hour". Lets be fact based. :-) I am being fact based. The comment was not directed at your posting behavior. It was with regards to the topic closed in question. I'm pretty sure Sundog told you it would be released soon. Don't come in here trying to stir mud. It's really lame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsnapp Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 4 minutes ago, Cameron said: I am being fact based. The comment was not directed at your posting behavior. It was with regards to the topic closed in question. I'm pretty sure Sundog told you it would be released soon. Don't come in here trying to stir mud. It's really lame. I did not come in here to stir mud. What is this name calling? Very ungentlemanly. I "came in here" to post twice. First to ask, once I found this thread and that Sundog mentioned there was a patch, if the patch would be posted this week. (A reasonable question as this is an urgent problem, and clearly if a patch isn't going to be released existing customers should at least be alerted via email to this significant problem.) I posted a second time to provide my fellow forum members _useful news_ that Sundog has at least passed on the patch to X-Aviation. Then you quoted me in your statement and made the imperative statement "relax yourself" but now claim you were not referring to me. And lastly you say I came here to stir mud. It seems it is you who is flinging the aspersions against my character, not the other way around. Sigh. Times I have posted relevant information of interest to other members here in this thread: 2 Times you have attacked people in this thread: 2 Concrete details provided about patch timeline by you: 0 Why am I the lame one here to cause trouble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted August 1, 2016 Report Share Posted August 1, 2016 38 minutes ago, jsnapp said: I did not come in here to stir mud. What is this name calling? Dude, look at your posts. You just keep going and going, LOOKING for a debate. 38 minutes ago, jsnapp said: Then you quoted me in your statement and made the imperative statement "relax yourself" but now claim you were not referring to me. That's right. Because you said: "Shame on Cameron then for locking a topical thread." Yet, in the thread which was locked, I specified I believed we had a handle on it. Your comment was entirely unnecessary AND inflammatory. That's mud slinging, sir. 38 minutes ago, jsnapp said: Times I have posted relevant information of interest to other members here in this thread: 2 Times you have attacked people in this thread: 2 Concrete details provided about patch timeline by you: 0 Why am I the lame one here to cause trouble? The fact you even feel the desire or need to create such a tally as this speaks volumes to the awkward desire you have to battle. Drop it. First and only warning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts