client crash since oct 21 patch

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by matouoli, Oct 21, 2015.

  1. matouoli Elder

    hi, since I got this computer ( 9 months ago ) I never crashed once , since oct 21 patch I crash a lot ( client crash ), any other getting this ?
  2. Zamiam Augur

    define " crash a lot" .. sense Oct 21st patch server has only been up 3 hours .. usually after a major patch I have to run the patcher did you try this ..
  3. Sklak Journeyman

    For me, I've gone from crashing on zoning maybe once a month, to client crashing on every ~3rd-4th zone line post patch
  4. XanaronPovar New Member

    I can mirror the above claim, every 3 to 4 zone having a client crash post update seems accurate.
  5. XanaronPovar New Member

    Actually just happened twice in the past 45 seconds
  6. ezrun New Member

    I 4 box. and get a crash on at least one box every other zoning event after this patch. Haven't had crashes in months and months.
  7. Tallie Elder

    I have also started crashing two or three times a day while zoning.
  8. CrazyLarth Augur

    I got crashes last night after wiz ports group - wiz crashed
    I got sk crashed clicking the campfire click.
    You are in the new zone you when you log in and kick your toon out.
  9. Zamiam Augur

    well im sure this will prolly jinx me (knock on wood) .. but ive had 3 to 4 of my accounts online this last day or 2 post patch zoning and doing HA's and not one crash ?
  10. Zunnoab Augur

    The patches seem to shuffle those most affected.

    This has been going on since at least House of Thule with no fix. A combination of this common zone crash and the sweeping nerfs is the ultimate anti-advertisement for the expansion.

    As it was explained to me in C++ RAM usage must be defined in advance for stuff. When the game hits about 1.3GB of RAM usage it crashes without exception. Since HoT more and more RAM has been used and since the game seems to have memory leaks or something that increases RAM usage every zone eventually it hits that allocated limit and crashes on zoning. It is exceptionally irritating to crash with many gigabytes of free RAM due to failure of the program to allocate it's usage (for years), if as it was described to me is correct.

    I cannot begin to estimate how much raid time this has cost us over the years. Some zones seem to accelerate the bug's end result, but even many years ago it would still happen after zoning enough times.
  11. toxin New Member

    crashing every 4-5 zones as well since patch
  12. mackal Augur

    It has nothing to do with C++, stop saying that! It's how they coded it, could be any other language as well!

    Looking at eqgame.exe it's not flagged for LAA, which means it's limited to 2 GB (this is the default compile option) You could try changing the flag, but I wouldn't recommend it, jchan or another dev might be able to comment on if that's safe or not :p
    Zunnoab likes this.
  13. Zunnoab Augur

    I am basing my comment off of a guildy who ran a debugger on the game's crash dumps who said it is the game hitting a limit based on how much the game asks to be allocated. 1.3GB is also way under the 2GB limit of a 32bit program not flagged for LAA.

    Regardless none of the specifics change the fact it is a huge issue. I will just call it "the memory size crash bug" in case as you say it is not a result of insufficient RAM allocation due to fixed size C++ structures the game requests.
  14. mackal Augur

    But that has nothing to do with C++ :p
    Zunnoab likes this.
  15. Zunnoab Augur

    His comment was that newer programming languages would compile to dynamically request more RAM allocation rather than crash in that situation. But anyway, I do not mean to derail. We both agree it is a RAM allocation issue regardless of the exact cause.
  16. mackal Augur

    Because C++ can't do that ...
  17. Zunnoab Augur

    That is the entire point of everything I just said. It wasn't a criticism of the game.
  18. mackal Augur

    You misread what I said.
  19. Zunnoab Augur

    Ah, I do not know the context of their comment. I could guess that it means having to create a new data structure entirely to move the data to and then destruct the old one, but at this point I'm guessing wildly and this was an argument of details to begin with.

    We don't disagree about the core cause regardless. It's obviously a memory usage issue.
  20. Leex Pewpewer

    Moar ram!?