Sounds like the same, yes. At some point Xastir can't keep up with an unfiltered full stream and the incoming queue gets bigger and bigger until you get a disconnection from the server. Xastir will process packets for a while out of the queue, then reconnect to the server if that option is checked.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:29 PM MLHPUB <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Xastir list, > > Could it be Xastir behaviour I have noticed before as a "TCP/IP > connexion lost" ? > Were big latencies after more than H24 uptime without any filter. > > Never tried again. > > 73 de F4ACU > Matthieu > > > Le 03/06/2019 à 23:37, Curt Mills a écrit : > > A point of reference: I put Xastir on a full feed last week and got up to > > 120k+ stations. I then switched to a range-filtered Firenet feed for the > > next 24 hours and the number kept increasing. The max it hit was 126,858 > > stations, then the number declined as some of the earlier stations > started > > timing out. > > > > That's by far the highest number of stations I've personally seen in > > Xastir. To get there I had to zoom way in and turn off display of > > stations/objects/weather alerts. Even then Xastir kept disconnecting from > > the remote server periodically because it would get too far behind in > > processing packets. After I switched to the filtered feed the processing > > time was no longer an issue and it stayed connected to the server. > > > > Xastir's in-memory "database" and packet decoding are not optimized for > > those kinds of numbers. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xastir mailing list > [email protected] > http://xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir > -- Curt, WE7U http://we7u.wetnet.net http://www.sarguydigital.com _______________________________________________ Xastir mailing list [email protected] http://xastir.org/mailman/listinfo/xastir
