alt3rn1ty Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 I dont know if I have r1630 or the newer svn at the moment, but I think it probably will be present in both : Found a minor issue Drag the indicated separator left and watch what happens. They start to overlap each other, so resizing those columns is not functional Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharlikran Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 Drag the indicated separator left and watch what happens. They start to overlap each other, so resizing those columns is not functionalIt has always done that, AFAIK. Which is why when I open any version of xEdit I have to resize it so I can see the columns I want. Since I know some overlap, I expand the window size to fit what I want on the left and right sides before I start doing anything. That is probably form VirtualTrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octopuss Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I downloaded the latest revision and noticed obscenely huge difference in memory usage compared to the latest version from Nexus. Previously, loading all the plugins and creating a merged patch ended with 1GB used memory. Now it's just 550. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 10, 2014 Author Share Posted July 10, 2014 I downloaded the latest revision and noticed obscenely huge difference in memory usage compared to the latest version from Nexus. Previously, loading all the plugins and creating a merged patch ended with 1GB used memory. Now it's just 550. Wow.From the changelog - fixed memory leaks Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Octopuss Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 I know. That's why I posted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Did you guys mark the Default Object Manager entry as an ITM? I just happened to note that with 3.0.33 it's marked in green, which would indicate it gets cleaned out by the cleaning process. I'm not sure that should be done since it contains entries from DLC and official patches that aren't in Skyrim.esm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 The DOBJ record does not operate on a "last one is winner" principle. Instead, it merges them all together, keeping only the last value for each specific "Use" entry. For that reason, three changes have been made * Redundant None/NULL entries get removed * Entries are sorted by Use value (which makes the line up correctly) * For each entry, the last one that sets a value should be considered as the winning entry (so if there are DOBJs later in the load order which don't have a value for a specific use value, the conflict detection shouldn't see that as overriding whatever the last value actually was). Now, there is currently something wrong with the implementation of that last point. It *should* mark the first mod that sets a value for a specific use as "master". It currently always sets the left-most (always skyrim.esm) as master, even if that doesn't define a value for a specific Use at all. With that fix in place (which I'll check in shortly), it now correctly marks the first mod that defines a specific use value as master. As long as there aren't any overrides or even conflicts, you'll probably still see the DOBJ show up with a green background, but a green background doesn't indicate "identical to master", it means "no conflict". "Identical to master" is signalled by a grey text colour. But after the fix, you'll see that end up being purple (meaning "master") in most cases. Thanks for pointing out the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Addition to the above: While the automatic remove ITM function isn't going to remove individual entries from the DOBJ record, authors of mods that do contain a DOBJ record (which outside of the official DLCs are exactly two in my load order of 180 module files: Immersive Armors and Weapon & Armor Fixes) should manually check their DOBJ and consider removing any unneeded entries as the "last one wins" rule applies to individual entries in the DOBJ the same way it applies normally to full records and can cause the same type of compatibility problems as ITM records. Though given how rare it is that a mod actually contains a DOBJ record, this is probably a very minor issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I was more concerned about the fact that, at present, 3.0.33 is removing the entire DOBJ record from each of the DLCs when that shouldn't be happening. I can see from how it's being displayed that this shouldn't be the case, but it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 I was more concerned about the fact that, at present, 3.0.33 is removing the entire DOBJ record from each of the DLCs when that shouldn't be happening. I can see from how it's being displayed that this shouldn't be the case, but it is Uploaded new version, tested on DB and DOBJ is not removed. Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 On a totally different topic, anyone got a good Delphi implementation for multiple sequence alignment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 On a totally different topic, anyone got a good Delphi implementation for multiple sequence alignment? When I was working on some bioinformatics software 10 years ago, I had the same problem but ended up integrating with Clustal and Blast. Clastal has sources available http://www.clustal.org/omega/clustal-omega-1.2.1.tar.gz and it is the best afaik. Looking back at it now, it was somewhat similar to xEdit when comparing sequences Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I'm looking for a solution to produce the optimal alignment of CTDAs (without sorting them). As an example, if you load only Skyrim.esm, Update.esm and HearthFires.esm, then have a look at: [iNFO:0008BBDD] ('Constance don't care much for strangers in the orphanage. Afraid someone might hurt one of us kids. Which, I gotta admit, is kind of nice.' in GRUP Topic Children of DialogueRiftenHellos [DIAL:00040760]) This currently shows as a conflict. But if you look at it closely, you can see that Update.esm changed the Type for the GetDeadCount call from "Equal to" to "Greater than or equal to". And HearthFires.esm added a new, additional condition at the top. With proper alignment, it would be easily visible that the last the last two conditions have remained unchanged in all 3 files, the GetDeadCount condition had its type changed in Update.esm and HearthFires.esm is correctly forwarding that change (resulting in a clean overwrite) and the new condition from HearthFires is added before the inherited conditions. Basically, what I need is a function that I feed an array of stringlists (filled with SortKeys) in, and it adds additional empty lines into these stringlists to to make them all the same length and line up as well as possible (but if possible, do not require exact string matches, just similar strings, otherwise the CTDA for GetDeadCount wouldn't line up). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 SVN 1696 generates an assertion when attempting to run Update.esm through a cleaning and then save the file. Actually, correction, it seems to be happening when attempting to save any file after cleaning it. TES5Edit_bugreport.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Something to do with the Objects array in DOBJ not having the expected size after writing it into the file. I'll check it out in more detail this evening when I'm back from work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElminsterAU Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Ok, the problem originated from wbDOBJObjectsAfterLoad, which called ObjectsContainer.RemoveElement(i, True); The implementation of function TwbContainer.RemoveElement(aPos: Integer; aMarkModified: Boolean = False): IwbElement; called InvalidateParentStorage (when aMarkModified is true)., when it really should be calling InvalidateStorage; Because of this, when the Objects array got saved, the "ExpectedSize" was the old size (with all the None/NULL entries still included), while the actual save only wrote the 5 entries that actually still existed into the stream. A sanity check afterwards that compares the before/after stream position with the expected size then raised the Assert. I'll check a fix in shortly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 18, 2014 Author Share Posted July 18, 2014 Uploaded new version. Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt3rn1ty Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Results with latest svn 1697 Original esm's used Update.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( First Time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 1290, Removed Records: 96, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 1194, Undeleted Records: 3, Elapsed Time: 00:00 Update.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( Second Time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 1194, Removed Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 1194, Undeleted Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:00 Dawnguard.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( First time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 98027, Removed Records: 630, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 97397, Undeleted Records: 82, Elapsed Time: 00:06 <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Dawnguard.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( Second time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 97396, Removed Records: 6, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 97390, Undeleted Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:06 <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Dawnguard.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( Third time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 97390, Removed Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 97390, Undeleted Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:06 <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 57 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Hearthfires.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( First time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 17797, Removed Records: 184, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 17613, Undeleted Records: 11, Elapsed Time: 00:01 <Warning: Plugin contains 5 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 5 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Hearthfires.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( Second time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 17613, Removed Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 17613, Undeleted Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:01 <Warning: Plugin contains 5 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 5 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Dragonborn.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( First time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 214386, Removed Records: 64, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 214322, Undeleted Records: 8, Elapsed Time: 00:07 <Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Dragonborn.esm Apply filter for cleaning ( Second time around ) [Removing "Identical to Master" records done] Processed Records: 214322, Removed Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:00 [Undeleting and Disabling References done] Processed Records: 214322, Undeleted Records: 0, Elapsed Time: 00:07 <Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted> <Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted references which can not be undeleted> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickychris90 Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 Earlier today I applied a filter to only show ITMs on my whole load order, using the last revision. And it showed that a lot of mods that were considered clean before, now aren't. From what I could see, the records highlighted are completely the same, save for the "version control info" field...so I guess that it's the intended behavior. BUT in some cases they were considered ITMs even though there was a change in the "XLRL - Location Reference" field, for example in an Unofficial Dawnguard Patch record of Abandoned Shack...is this still normal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 You should never perform cleaning with your entire load order loaded at once. The results will not come out the way you are hoping. ALWAYS clean things one file at a time, starting from the top of the load list and moving toward the bottom. Yes. It's tedious. It's no fun. It's going to take a lot of time for a big load order. It's also the only way the process can work correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 21, 2014 Author Share Posted July 21, 2014 Added XLRL subrecords are treated as ITM, this was discussed some time ago. If XLRL already existed and was modified, it won't be ITM. Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Hasn't that already been getting treated that way for some time now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickychris90 Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 @Arthmoor: yeah I know, I wasn't cleaning them... just applying a filter to see which plugins were considered to have ITMs, to later clean those one by one. @Zilav Oops, found it now in the changelog of version. Didn't know about that, sorry for the noob question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zilav Posted July 26, 2014 Author Share Posted July 26, 2014 New version uploaded, details in the first post. Please keep an eye on your plugins, there were quite a lot of changes and major speed optimizations. Dragonblood 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted July 27, 2014 Share Posted July 27, 2014 <Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted NavMeshes which can not be undeleted><Warning: Plugin contains 1 deleted references which can not be undeleted> What's the second one indicate? Never seen that one come up before. Is there a way to find it? I tried filtering for deleted items but only got the navmesh when I did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now