Managing the Kuju folder - will this idea work?

[peterfhayes]

Gary
I have no idea why it is that big ie 3GB- but it has NO impact on the running of TS2017.
My point is that size may not be a factor in how the kuju folder behaves or misbehaves.
pH

[ade72]

Well, I've done a bit of experimenting involving removing enough stuff to get my Kuju folder down to about 8Gb, just leaving AP HST reskins in there. I then tried to load my two test scenarios i.e. the two that I'm really keen to play but always fail to load with a dump file, Tubemad's and this workshop one set on the Weardale and Teesdale.

With a reduced Kuju folder, they still failed. So it seems unlikely the Kuju folder is anything to do with it, bearing out what Mike and Peter said. So I then tried lowering the graphics quality slider, which I usually keep one step below maximum. Even with this set to the minimum possible setting I couldn't get the scenarios to work. Lowering other settings didn't help either.

With this in mind I stuck logmate on and allowed the two scenarios to fail. However, interpreting the logs is beyond my technical ability. I know from reading other threads that the last part of the log is most relevant. If anyone has time to help decipher them I'd be most grateful in case there is something about my installation that is the issue here. Or am I getting obsessive over a couple of scenarios amongst thousands?

EDIT: The errors in the logfile posted in the thread for the Plymouth-Paddington scenario by J1o2h3n4 are near-identical to the ones I observed.

[gptech]

The errors in the logfile posted in the thread for the Plymouth-Paddington scenario by J1o2h3n4 are near-identical to the ones I observed.

The error relating to bo01_wh01 etc aren't *real* errors--everybody will get them, bo01=bogie 1, wh01=wheel 1
As a quick test see what happens when you have LogMate recording what happens when you load one of the other scenarios that call for the S8 stock but work--you should get the same error.

[Auscgu]

I run a program by the name of WinDirStat "http://windirstat.sourceforge.net/"
You can run this on the asset folder for railworks and it lists the files by size order.
Kuju is the 6 largest file on my machine.
DTG and RSC are the top two. Must have some assets?
I have played with the with the asset directory and it does affect the running of TS2017.
I was having trouble running and creating scenarios in the larger routes.
The route Glorious Devon 1958 tests my older machine.
I would start to create a scenario and just add a few assets and it would fall over.
When I ran the routes you would have to save all the time and near any high asset areas it would crash.
I removed all the assets files from route that I never use and went through the Kuju file and removed anything not required(Not used).
Note regular back-ups are essential, I use 7-Zip and zip the entire railworks file and place in a back-up by date order.
You then can replace all the files at anytime.
I left all the directory structure and removed just the assets so you can replace as required.
I can now build scenarios and run Glorious Devon 1958 without a crash or only one in the entire route from Exeter to Plymouth.
You can prove the diffrence by running LogMate.exe and load the same route and scenario with and without the reduced asset files.
You will see the initial load size reduce the amount of Ram used. The system is unstable once your close to the 3gb limit.

[gptech]

When is a folder a file?.......and what 3GB limit are you referring to?

[peterfhayes]

You will see the initial load size reduce the amount of Ram used. The system is unstable once your close to the 3gb limit.

Windows doesn't work like that! Any 32-bit app like TS 2017 can access up to 4GB of RAM running in a 64-bit OS. Windows will never allow that 4GB limit to be exceeded (unless there is faulty code) and will swap out items no longer needed in the RAM to the Paging File. No app uses RAM it just accesses addresses in the RAM/PF. If it was a RAM issue Windows NOT TS2017 would give you a warning that you need to turn down settings, etc, and you may get a BSOD.

Now the virtual address space (VAS) is another matter and that could contribute to the issues you have listed in your post.
Have you ever had the same issues using a DTG route?

pH

[gptech]

Even with VAS Peter, the only time I can think of where there's a 3GB limit is when running under a 32bit OS with the 3GB switch applied....hence my question as to what limit he's on about.

I think the major part of the problem/issue is...

tests my older machine.

and rather than purely a game issue we're looking at a hardware one.

[peterfhayes]

Gary
I thought that but he specifically mentions RAM in the preceding sentence!
pH

[gptech]

True, but we've seen them mixed up before.....bear in mind that folders are files in the same post too!

[Auscgu]

Gptech
Your right about the folder and file mix-up

I run a program by the name of WinDirStat "http://windirstat.sourceforge.net/"
You can run this on the asset folder for railworks and it lists the files by size order.
Kuju is the 6 largest file on my machine.
DTG and RSC are the top two. Must have some assets?
I have played with the with the asset directory and it does affect the running of TS2017.
I was having trouble running and creating scenarios in the larger routes.
The route Glorious Devon 1958 tests my older machine.
I would start to create a scenario and just add a few assets and it would fall over.
When I ran the routes you would have to save all the time and near any high asset areas it would crash.
I removed all the assets files from route that I never use and went through the Kuju file and removed anything not required(Not used).
Note regular back-ups are essential, I use 7-Zip and zip the entire railworks file and place in a back-up by date order.
You then can replace all the files at anytime.
I left all the directory structure and removed just the assets so you can replace as required.
I can now build scenarios and run Glorious Devon 1958 without a crash or only one in the entire route from Exeter to Plymouth.
You can prove the diffrence by running LogMate.exe and load the same route and scenario with and without the reduced asset files.
You will see the initial load size reduce the amount of Ram used. The system is unstable once your close to the 3gb limit.

Machine details

Processor Information:
CPU Vendor: AuthenticAMD
CPU Brand: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 850 Processor
CPU Family: 0x10
CPU Model: 0x5
CPU Stepping: 0x3
CPU Type: 0x0
Speed: 3311 Mhz
4 logical processors
4 physical processors
HyperThreading: Unsupported
FCMOV: Supported
SSE2: Supported
SSE3: Supported
SSSE3: Unsupported
SSE4a: Supported
SSE41: Unsupported
SSE42: Unsupported
AES: Unsupported
AVX: Unsupported
CMPXCHG16B: Supported
LAHF/SAHF: Supported
PrefetchW: Supported

Network Information:
Network Speed:

Operating System Version:
Windows 10 (64 bit)
NTFS: Supported
Crypto Provider Codes: Supported 311 0x0 0x0 0x0

Video Card:
Driver: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

DirectX Driver Name: nvd3dum.dll
Driver Version: 21.21.13.7653
DirectX Driver Version: 21.21.13.7653
Driver Date: 29 Dec 2016
OpenGL Version: 4.5
Desktop Color Depth: 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Refresh Rate: 60 Hz
DirectX Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
VendorID: 0x10de
DeviceID: 0x1c03
Revision: 0xa1
Number of Monitors: 1
Number of Logical Video Cards: 1
No SLI or Crossfire Detected
Primary Display Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Desktop Resolution: 1920 x 1080
Primary Display Size: 23.54" x 13.23" (26.97" diag)
59.8cm x 33.6cm (68.5cm diag)
Primary Bus: PCI Express 16x
Primary VRAM: 6143 MB
Supported MSAA Modes: 2x 4x 8x

Sound card:
Audio device: SPDIF-Out (Sound Blaster X-Fi S

Memory:
RAM: 16345 Mb

The system has a 64 bit operating system and the Vram is shown at 6143mb
I have added the solid start hard drive and GPU.
I have monitored the processor usage with the old GPU and it was about 50% to 60%.
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB is no longer the bottle neck and you see higher frame rates.

Cleaning up the DTG, Kuju & RSC folders has reduced the scenario load size in the Vram to 2200 mb from 3500 mb
I run mostly the 1950's steam and early diesel routes which use the freeware packs.
I have removed all the uk steam locos and just loaded the required locos.
I replace the older locos with the new DLC as its released with RWtools.
I don't use the american and european DLC you had to purchase with the updated so it has been removed
The system is now stable.
Thanks for your comments and happy to learn more about the system.
Cheers Ausc

[peterfhayes]

Auscgu

Cleaning up the DTG, Kuju & RSC folders has reduced the scenario load size in the Vram to 2200 mb from 3500 mb

Sorry , but that makes little sense in the way that computers work.
The VRAM is dependent only on what the cpu sends it ie that code that is actually being delivered in real time, like when you are loading/ running a scenario, and it will vary from scenario to scenario and the size/complexity of the scenario.
It shouldn't vary when you clean up individual folders - what exactly did you clean up?

You have also upgraded your video card which has increased the memory bandwidth significantly, so your VRAM reduction could be attributed to that and/or a particular scenario.
Unfortunately, you can't make sweeping statements about a universal VRAM reduction, as there are too many variables in play .
pH

[TransportSteve]

I think everyone is forgetting that our Kuju folder is split into 3 entities. RailSimulator, which houses all the default German and British routes assets, buildings, signalling, trackwork, etc, etc, as well as all locomotives and rolling stock, and repaints, my RS folder is 14GBs with all the reskins and everything else I've collected over the last 10 years, then, we have the very small RailSimulatorCore Folder which is only 70mb, then, we have RailSimulatorUS, which again is huge, abut 11GBs with all my repaints and whatnot, so, my complete Kuju Folder is over 25GBs which is probably far more than our PC's can handle at times. I have had to resort to instead of moving folders around, but, to actually take them out of the Kuju folder altogether to slim it down, but, I still have trouble on some routes that utilise the KUJU folders and it's a nightmare if you forget to put them back.

Cheerz. Transport Steve.