Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
That error is not exclusive for the random buildings (at least with the win 32bit fgfs). Just try to fly over detailed scenery long enough. With trees enabled the problem shows up sooner. And if you use a heavy airplane like the 787-8 from Omega95, fgfs will run out of memory on startup if you have a detailed scenery. The current win fgfs 32bit makes it impossible to fly a distance without running in this error. Oliver Am 09.06.2012 23:29, schrieb Heiko Schulz: > Stuart, > > I got following error message: > > Warning: detected OpenGL error 'out of memory' at after RenderBin::draw(..) > > Heiko -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
> I'd like to propose having random buildings enabled in > preferences.xml, so they are switched on by default. I think they > improve the realism of our Urban, Suburban and Town sceneries > significantly. I would suggest to have them on as default (so that people are aware that they are there) but set to a low default density (0.2 or so) (so that there are no really bad framerate and/or memory issues). Does thay sound like a plan? > Would some of the textures also be applicable to the Caribbean? Yes, I guess the theme 'volcanic tropical island' is fairly generic and would also fit, say, parts of Indonesia really well. As I said earlier, I see gathering textures as assembling something like a toolkit - we don't really want new textures for every region, we just want to get the mix right for various regions. If anyone is interested in defining yet more regions, feel free! > I wonder whether we should set the regions/materials.xml as the > default in preferences.xml? They represent a significant improvement > to texturing in the regions that are defined. I certainly prefer the regional pack, but I'm hardly objective... * Thorsten -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
Stuart, I got following error message: Warning: detected OpenGL error 'out of memory' at after RenderBin::draw(..) Heiko still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote: >> Out of interest, do you have it enabled by default now? I'm interested to >> know whether you consider >> the frame-rate hit acceptable for the extra eye-candy. > > I don't fly that often these days, most of my time is spent on launching the > 747 and testing various things. That sounds very familiar :) > Just did another test, and the outcome is rather interesting I think. This > time with the 747-400: > 0.00 : 45 > 1.00 : 35 > 2.00 : 30 > > Looks as if the buildings have a high impact, until the framerates come > within a certain range (around 25-30 fps). > Setting the density to 3 isn't significantly different from the fps at 2... > Are the buildings "smart" and do they base > their looks/density on the framerates? The buildings certainly aren't "smart", but 25-30fps is around the range that I get normally. It may be that your memory bus to the GPU can handle 25-30fps but not much more. Note also that the building density is not guaranteed. Building density is also constrained by building minimum distance, so density 2 does not represent twice the number of buildings in reality. -Stuart -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
> Out of interest, do you have it enabled by default now? I'm interested to > know whether you consider > the frame-rate hit acceptable for the extra eye-candy. I don't fly that often these days, most of my time is spent on launching the 747 and testing various things. Don't need nice looking scenery for that, so I've everything disabled by default :-) Just did another test, and the outcome is rather interesting I think. This time with the 747-400: 0.00 : 45 1.00 : 35 2.00 : 30 Looks as if the buildings have a high impact, until the framerates come within a certain range (around 25-30 fps). Setting the density to 3 isn't significantly different from the fps at 2... Are the buildings "smart" and do they base their looks/density on the framerates? Gijs -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
Hi All, Thanks very much for the quick feedback. >From the immediate feedback, it looks like the performance issues are more significant than I had thought, and I need to look at improving performance and reducing the memory footprint before we can reasonably switch this on by default. More detailed responses below. -Stuart On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Vivian Meazza wrote: > Here, with Win7(32), the cost in memory is such the FG won't start reliably > at KLAX with Random Objects, Random Veg, and Random Buildings set to true > and = 1. Any 2 out of the 3 are OK. Add Advanced Weather and FG reliably > crashes out-of-memory. Much as I like Random Buildings, I would be very > cautious about going down this route, as I think we're pushing the envelope > here. OK. I was under the (false) impression you were running out of memory at much higher building densities. I agree that by default we should at least be able to start! On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Gijs de Rooy wrote: > Tested with the UFO, Rembrandt disabled, looking at downtown San Francisco > (plenty of buildings in view). > With KSFO being our default airport, users are very likely to see those > large chunks of urban areas. See my > forum profile for system specs. > > Building level, followed by the average fps: > > 0.00 : 140 > 0.25 : 130 > 0.50 : 115 > 0.75 : 80 > 1.00 : 65 > 2.00 : 40 > > It's neither linear nor exponental... Don't know what to advise now. It > starts to look nice from 1.0 onwards, > but halfing the framerates is quite something. Apart from all the last value, those are all higher frame-rates than I get. Lucky you! Nevertheless, a halving of frame-rates is significant. Out of interest, do you have it enabled by default now? I'm interested to know whether you consider the frame-rate hit acceptable for the extra eye-candy. On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Heiko Schulz wrote: > Today I made a simple flight from KLAX to KSFO with the 777-200ER with > scenery downloaded from TerraSync (TerraSync itself disabled), skydome-shader > enabled, random buildings enabled (density =1), trees enabled (density =1), > fair weather without (!) 3d-clouds and default materials.xml. > > After just mid distance I got the first error messages and the buildings went > black. Coming again to city area everytime a tile had to be loaded the sim > freezed for several seconds. What error messages are you seeing? > I must admit I expected a better behavior. > What I noticed, different to the trees, the distance of loading random > building increases together with the visibility while the trees has a limited > range. > > Would be something possible as well for random buildings? And if so, would it > help in this issue? I think you are seeing different visibility ranges being used for buildings compared to trees, rather than different loading distances. At present, the buildings have a fixed LoD range (20km IIRC), which I should fix. -Stuart -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
Stuart, > ...There is a significant memory footprint, but this appears to be only > an issue when using building densities >1. > At present our default is for random vegetation and random objects to > be switched on, both of which also have fps and memory impacts. > I'd therefore like to suggest that we enable the random buildings by > default as well. > Does anyone have any objections, or want to second the proposal? Your work does really look great, especially at areas like San Fran, LA and other big cities. It improves really much the graphics! Framerates are better than expected, and it shows some eyecandy like "reflecting" windows. So I would agree to enabling it per default if, well if the memory foot print would be lower. Today I made a simple flight from KLAX to KSFO with the 777-200ER with scenery downloaded from TerraSync (TerraSync itself disabled), skydome-shader enabled, random buildings enabled (density =1), trees enabled (density =1), fair weather without (!) 3d-clouds and default materials.xml. After just mid distance I got the first error messages and the buildings went black. Coming again to city area everytime a tile had to be loaded the sim freezed for several seconds. I have 4GB RAM; and my GPU (Nvidea GTX640) has about 1 GB VRAM. I must admit I expected a better behavior. What I noticed, different to the trees, the distance of loading random building increases together with the visibility while the trees has a limited range. Would be something possible as well for random buildings? And if so, would it help in this issue? Heiko still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
> I ran a poll on the forums to determine the fps impact of the random > buildings Oops, forgot to vote. Will provide some of my test-results here then: Tested with the UFO, Rembrandt disabled, looking at downtown San Francisco (plenty of buildings in view). With KSFO being our default airport, users are very likely to see those large chunks of urban areas. See my forum profile for system specs. Building level, followed by the average fps: 0.00 : 140 0.25 : 130 0.50 : 115 0.75 : 80 1.00 : 65 2.00 : 40 It's neither linear nor exponental... Don't know what to advise now. It starts to look nice from 1.0 onwards, but halfing the framerates is quite something. Gijs -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
Stuart > Hi All, > > I'd like to propose having random buildings enabled in preferences.xml, so > they are switched on by default. I think they improve the realism of our > Urban, Suburban and Town sceneries significantly. > > I ran a poll on the forums to determine the fps impact of the random > buildings (http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16204). > Out of 15 responses > - 5 had no frame-rate impact > - 5 had minimal impact (one or two fps) > - 4 had noticeable impact, but considered it worthwhile > - 1 had noticeable impact, and would have to consider enabling it on a flight- > by-flight basis > - 0 reported a major impact on frame-rate that would preclude switching it > on. > > Here on the list, James (at least) has noticed really significant fps impact. > > There is a significant memory footprint, but this appears to be only an issue > when using building densities >1. > > At present our default is for random vegetation and random objects to be > switched on, both of which also have fps and memory impacts. > > I'd therefore like to suggest that we enable the random buildings by default > as well. > > Does anyone have any objections, or want to second the proposal? > > -Stuart Here, with Win7(32), the cost in memory is such the FG won't start reliably at KLAX with Random Objects, Random Veg, and Random Buildings set to true and = 1. Any 2 out of the 3 are OK. Add Advanced Weather and FG reliably crashes out-of-memory. Much as I like Random Buildings, I would be very cautious about going down this route, as I think we're pushing the envelope here. Vivian -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Enabled random buildings in preferences.xml
Hi All, I'd like to propose having random buildings enabled in preferences.xml, so they are switched on by default. I think they improve the realism of our Urban, Suburban and Town sceneries significantly. I ran a poll on the forums to determine the fps impact of the random buildings (http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16204). Out of 15 responses - 5 had no frame-rate impact - 5 had minimal impact (one or two fps) - 4 had noticeable impact, but considered it worthwhile - 1 had noticeable impact, and would have to consider enabling it on a flight-by-flight basis - 0 reported a major impact on frame-rate that would preclude switching it on. Here on the list, James (at least) has noticed really significant fps impact. There is a significant memory footprint, but this appears to be only an issue when using building densities >1. At present our default is for random vegetation and random objects to be switched on, both of which also have fps and memory impacts. I'd therefore like to suggest that we enable the random buildings by default as well. Does anyone have any objections, or want to second the proposal? -Stuart -- Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
