RailWorksProc error

[smarty2]

Well i tried this again started the RW's launcher started RW's from there, minimised and shut down the launcher scenario loads and i drove it for 20 minutes no problems continuing testing.

Mart

[CaptScarlet]

Well i tried this again started the RW's launcher started RW's from there, minimised and shut down the launcher scenario loads and i drove it for 20 minutes no problems continuing testing.

Mart

Interesting, maybe this is where a lot of the problems are coming from. Most games upon starting close their launcher so perhaps there is a conflict somewhere. Hope you tell RSC.

BTW do you still get railproc errors when exiting from the scenario or world editor after you have closed the launcher ?

John

[smarty2]

Hi John, yes i do, however i am experiencing a considerable amount of stability with the launcher closed, at this rate i may even get this scenario finished! And yes i have sent this information to support.

Mart

[Bullet399]

Well i tried this again started the RW's launcher started RW's from there, minimised and shut down the launcher scenario loads and i drove it for 20 minutes no problems continuing testing.

Mart

Interesting, maybe this is where a lot of the problems are coming from. Most games upon starting close their launcher so perhaps there is a conflict somewhere. Hope you tell RSC.

BTW do you still get railproc errors when exiting from the scenario or world editor after you have closed the launcher ?

John

the error when closing after using editor is remaining. What i am wondering for is that railworksproc uses 50% CPU-Usage (Taskmanager). Ihmo a little bit high. Have checked some other games and thy uses about 10%-15%.

[smarty2]

Well i thought this important enough to bump this thread up as i seem to have eliminated the dreaded proc error in the editor or playing my scenario! I have reduced the settings in the options screen down a notch to medium density on some of the settings, like particle density/passenger density/low detail shadows off/terrain texture and object texture/scenery detail 9, all other settings are on high. so far so good.

Mart

[Bullet399]

Well i thought this important enough to bump this thread up as i seem to have eliminated the dreaded proc error in the editor or playing my scenario! I have reduced the settings in the options screen down a notch to medium density on some of the settings, like particle density/passenger density/low detail shadows off/terrain texture and object texture/scenery detail 9, all other settings are on high. so far so good.

Mart

will try also

[paulharvey]

I have been watching this thread with interest, I am begining to think it is a hardware issue, I have never had a RWproc error, however, I run my system with the 3Gb Switch enabled as default as I run FSX (Flight Simulator X) as well. I have 4Gb on my PC and am running Windows XP 32, and that can only "see" 2Gb, using the 3Gb switch forces it to see recognise 3Gb. I wonder if that may be a solution for some people. In FSX without this switch can cause out of memory errors, and that might be what is causing the RWProc error problems in RW, especially if lowering the scenery demand on a system seems to work. I can run RW maxed out without problems using the 3Gb switch.

Paul

[Wikkus]

Windows XP 32, ... can only "see" 2Gb, using the 3Gb switch forces it to see recognise 3Gb.

Sorry, but the above statement is not quite true, Paul and a little misleading to boot. The versions of Windows we're talking about here (32-bit NT-based) can address a maximum of 4GB of RAM. This is usually divided equally between applications and the kernel (the Windows "executive software") 2GB/2GB.

The 3GB "switch" merely allows an extra GB of RAM to be added to the virtual address space that can be allocated to programs. However, what Microsoft give with one hand, they taketh away with the other so you then only have 1GB that the kernel can use. With care and attention, one can pare-down the resources that use the kernel space (we're talking drivers and services, primarily) so that this isn't usually a problem.

I wonder if that may be a solution for some people. In FSX without this switch can cause out of memory errors, and that might be what is causing the RWProc error problems in RW, especially if lowering the scenery demand on a system seems to work. I can run RW maxed out without problems using the 3Gb switch.

This is certainly worth trying for those that know what they're doing, however, 64-bit operating systems are increasingly prevalent and like for like, they do away with this problem -- 4GB of RAM in a 64-bit machine means just that. It's not uncommon to see 6 or 8GB these days, too (although this is likely a little OTT...).

It's also very important to bear in mind that the condition and configuration of one's page file(s) has a significant bearing on the performance (or otherwise) of a system. Many people get this wrong too and make it too large. If you're not sure, leave well alone. Since XP, the OS does a pretty good job at managing its own swapfile, however, this further depends on the amount of space available on the host drive and whether that space is a nice, contiguous block or whether it's scattered all over the disk.

Rgds, Rik.

EDIT: fixed malformed tag.

[CaptainBazza]

Rick, expanding on that business of the swapfile, I've made mine 2048 mb min/max, sys XP, with 2gb ram, on the fastest SATA2 drive. I have the proc error on leaving RW, but didn't initially.

I will now consciously unload as many TSRs as possible before commencing a RW session. Plus, disabling Steam.

Cheers Bazza

[Wikkus]

Rick, expanding on that business of the swapfile, I've made mine 2048 mb min/max, sys XP, with 2gb ram, on the fastest SATA2 drive. I have the proc error on leaving RW, but didn't initially.

I will now consciously unload as many TSRs as possible before commencing a RW session. Plus, disabling Steam.

Cheers Bazza

Y'aarr, Cap'n

I'm not entirely convinced that this is a memory issue. Generally speaking, memory issues manifest themselves on loading rather than unloading resources. It's always a good idea to strip out unnecessary apps that hog resources, mind.

Fixed-sized swapfiles are generally the best performers in memory-intensive systems and/or where disk input/output (i/o) throughput is critical. Certainly for RS/RW, disk i/o performance is a significant factor if one is to minimise the "stuttering" experienced when transitioning between zones, e.g. that momentary pause you get when coming into an urbanised area from open countryside.

In your case, your swapfile is a little on the small side. As a guide, the total amount of swap space should be 1.5 times the total physical RAM.

Furthermore, if your machine contains more than one physical drive, e.g. you have a drive for the OS and a drive for programs/data, etc., then try splitting the swap across the drives. In your case, were it two physical drives, then 1.5GB on each drive.

This is all somewhat moot if the data on the drives is fragmented. I recommend a good 3rd-party defrag routine rather than the one Microsoft provided in XP as the MS-provided one cannot optimise the swapfile or free space. Incidentally, Vista's defrag routine appears to be marginally better than that in XP but still not brilliant and also cannot optimise any files that are being used at the time... Two such 3rd party apps I can recommend are Diskeeper {sic} and Perfectdisk.

It's a bit of a pain in the bum to get it all nice and straight if not starting from a nice and straight "new" machine in the first place, but I'll try and outline the nuts and bolts to getting your swappie to behave itself:

• Defrag your drives
  Delete any swapfiles by setting "no swapfile" (Windows will complain at this juncture)
  Reboot the machine (it will be dog-slow with no swapfile)
  Defrag the machine (again!)
  Create appropriately sized swapfiles as outlined above
  Reboot
  Defrag

Depending on the size of the drives and how much data is on them combined with how fragmented they are, this could take a couple of hours (massively longer if using XP's built-in defrag...). Remember too that this isn't one of those one-time deals; you need to keep the things defrag'd which means running the routine weekly, ideally. The nice thing about the two products mentioned above is that they can be run as a service and therefore will happily churn away in the background keeping your stuff optimised all the time. This means that any scheduled defrags tend to be really quick when they occur.

Happy to help if there's anything that needs expanding upon.

Cheers, Rik.

[rabid]

Excellent advice Rik !
Something I've always done as a matter of course, and it can make a real difference performance-wise.

[smarty2]

I am running vista 64 bit with 4gig of 800 mhz ram, I have a sizeable page file, RW's is a greedy beggar and with all settings on high it leaves me with app 1gig of free ram. My problems are assets loading maybe with a high poly count or lod? which would crash the sim, but this error never occurs without Ni ( non intelligent traffic ) or nits for short as there is no artificiall intelligence with the currently used system! Reducing the sliders appears to have eliminated this error and has had the added effect of releasing a further 300mbp of ram in the process, without any real reduction in visual quality. As long as this really annoying error is stopped I am happy, however it still does it on exit but I am sure that is a steam error. Mart

[CaptainBazza]

I agree Rik, thanks for the tip. I will increase the swapfile size to 2.5 gb.

Cheers Bazza

[ka959]

I agree Rik, thanks for the tip. I will increase the swapfile size to 2.5 gb.

Cheers Bazza

I remember back in the Windows 95 days, about Swapfiles, but haven't a clue where it is, nor how to do this with Windows XP ! Care to explain how this is done, as it might help me somewhat ? Please, and thanks heaps. Cheers.

Regards...

Jim McDermott

[ightenhill]

So far the only error s i get are a proc.exe crash every time i close the program... I take it this is the known issue on the wiki as I do probably use the editor every time ..