Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

P Suite Crash

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts


  • P Suite Crash

    Using V3.2.3.3 with P1K
    Suite crashes without warning when adding consecutive String tags.
    1D or 2D Arrays.


  • #2
    I was able to add (50) 1D array consecutive string tags and (50) 2D array tags without issue with a P1 cpu set up in hardware configuration.

    I would suggest upgrading to 3.2.4.1 and see if the issue still occurs.

    If yes, then we will need to contact our technical support team and provide a system report. We will also need you log files which are located Program Data->AutomationDirect->Pro Suite 3.2.3.3->Log. The program data folder is considered a hidden folder so you will need to make sure "hidden items" is checked in Windows explorer.
    If you have an urgent issue, please contact AutomationDirect's Technical Support team.

    AutomationDirect.com Technical Support: 1(800) 633-0405 or (770) 844-4200 Email Tech Support

    Comment



    • #3
      I wanted to get up to speed with pbw, but AD seems to have scrubbed v3.2.3.3 from the ftp.
      I do have it on another drive!

      Comment



      • #4
        pbw, online online or offline?
        By consecutive, do you mean selecting the 'consecutive tags' in the tagdatabase or do you mean that you make one tag, then make another?
        What size are the array's dimensions?

        I cannot duplicate.
        Last edited by kewakl; 07-24-2018, 01:57 PM.

        Comment



        • #5
          Originally posted by kewakl View Post
          pbw, online online or offline?
          By consecutive, do you mean selecting the 'consecutive tags' in the tagdatabase or do you mean that you make one tag, then make another?
          What size are the array's dimensions?

          I cannot duplicate.
          Haven't had time to upgrade.
          I need a "whole bunch" of strings,BIG strings.
          Attached Files

          Comment



          • #6
            I can duplicate your issue on both 3.2.3.3 and 3.2.4.1. Went back as far as version 2.1 and it displays same issue. Thanks for the screenshot that helped in duplicating the issue.

            I can cause the issue even when creating only 200 consecutive with your other limits. 100 seems to work fine. Workaround is to create (5) groups of 100 consecutive String tags. They can have the same name. When creating the next group have the name start with "Buffer100" for example to get Buffer 100-199, then create next group "Buffer200", and so forth. Until you get the 500 total you need.

            I will report this to our QA team to begin investigating.
            If you have an urgent issue, please contact AutomationDirect's Technical Support team.

            AutomationDirect.com Technical Support: 1(800) 633-0405 or (770) 844-4200 Email Tech Support

            Comment



            • #7
              Thanks____

              Comment



              • #8
                @AD Maybe set a limit to the 'Consecutive Tags to Create' field. Enforce in the TagDB dialog, so it is not escalated to a fault/crash.
                pbw, thanks for going a bit further!

                Comment



                • #9
                  Wow. That is an insane amount of array columns to store data in. 50,000 columns each and 500 of them is 25 million tag spaces for storing messages. What do you use 25 million for?

                  Comment



                  • #10
                    Originally posted by P3K_ADC_Eng View Post
                    I can duplicate your issue on both 3.2.3.3 and 3.2.4.1. Went back as far as version 2.1 and it displays same issue. Thanks for the screenshot that helped in duplicating the issue.

                    I can cause the issue even when creating only 200 consecutive with your other limits. 100 seems to work fine. Workaround is to create (5) groups of 100 consecutive String tags. They can have the same name. When creating the next group have the name start with "Buffer100" for example to get Buffer 100-199, then create next group "Buffer200", and so forth. Until you get the 500 total you need.

                    I will report this to our QA team to begin investigating.
                    SW 3.2.3.3
                    I got ~250 using this method, but it crashed to desktop during the 200-300 creation. -- using pbws 50000 cols/128 chars/100 consecutive. (indicator got to 8% on the 200-300 trial)

                    A compile after ONE group of arrays (50000 cols/128 chars) errors out saying Data size 646,352,268 bytes exceeded maximum of 50,331,648 bytes - hmm maybe a crashworthy event!
                    Also cannot calculate memory usage due to compiler error - shucks, I was expecting the nominal ~6% that I always see, regardless of the project.

                    [EDIT] I cannot create the third set of (100) arrays at 50000 cols at a SINGLE character length -- crash to desktop
                    Last edited by kewakl; 07-25-2018, 04:49 PM.

                    Comment



                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MikeN View Post
                      Wow. That is an insane amount of array columns to store data in. 50,000 columns each and 500 of them is 25 million tag spaces for storing messages. What do you use 25 million for?
                      Yeah, probably not going to happen! 25M tags storing 128 characters exceeds 50MB memory size of pac.

                      Comment



                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MikeN View Post
                        Wow. That is an insane amount of array columns to store data in. 50,000 columns each and 500 of them is 25 million tag spaces for storing messages. What do you use 25 million for?
                        I do quite a bit of custom Com protocols and I wanted to see how many days worth of com data the plc can store.
                        I also noted that on some chips if you get near the max data storage they start getting erratic behavior and basically wanted to what happens and maybe see how long of a scan time is required to move all that data around.
                        It seems no matter how big my project and how many tags I use I can't get the memory usage indicator above 7%.
                        But I really don't "need" 25M tags.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X