Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Certain fluid automation blocks reset fermentation barrel progress #322

Closed
esotericist opened this issue Apr 18, 2016 · 28 comments
Closed
Labels

Comments

@esotericist
Copy link

GC 2.5.2, forge 1614.

If you set up an Extra Utilities fluid transfer node with a filter, or a Thermal Dynamics fluiduct+servo with a whitelist, every time they attempt to pull from a fermentation barrel -- even if it fails due to the barrel not having the matching fluid -- progress in fermentation is reset back to zero.

There might be other fluid transfer tools that do similar, but those are the two I encountered it with. I hear reports that EnderIO conduits do not, and I've confirmed thaumcraft decanting golems do not so there's some difference in handling somehow, but it really seems like the barrel should behave consistently regardless.

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist
If I remember clearly, the barrel will refresh it's recipes when the fluid changes, if the fluid is the same, it should just ignore it and carry on, otherwise it would reset the recipe and time...

I'll need to look into it some more, or just go back to the inefficient "search for recipe every tick" method, which worked, but was really cray cray in terms of performance

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Could you give the latest development build a spin (remember to backup your world),
you can find them here #307

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

Currently preparing a push for the mod pack for my server. Will try out the dev build in SSP afterwards. It's more than just me and one other person now, so I have to be all responsible about data integrity and stuff. :D

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Pfft, just break everything, you get bug reports faster that way :P

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

This is my social life, not my day job. :D

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

Problem persists in SSP with both extra utilities transfer nodes and thermal dynamics fluiducts with dev build 840bc88.

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist What are these mods even doing to break my beloved barrel ;_;

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

"Do you have it now?" "No, I'm busy." "What about now?" "No, I'm trying to ferment--" "Is it there now?" "NO!" "I'm pulling some of the stuff now." "It still isn't there yet!"

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Sounds ... very accurate...

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 Well, you asked. :D

More seriously, is something ridiculous happening like them 'changing' the liquid contents by zero when they make the attempt and realize it's not what they want?

Or is it somehow possible for just the query as to contents to cause this effect?

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist That was what I was thinking as well, they probably pulled everything out of the barrel for 1 tick, and then put it back

That would cause the barrel to refresh it's recipe within that tick, seeing as no fluid was present right there and then, it could assume "oh, the recipe is inavlid, better null it", a tick later "oh fluid is available, lemme find the recipe"

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 And people wonder why forge 1.8.9 was getting new fluid infrastructure...

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Well there is a new build up, I doubt it would do anything to this bug though, but it's worth a shot

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist I've added a config option to fallback to the old barrel behaviour (it looks for the recipe every tick), it can be found in growthcraft/cellar.conf under Fermenting Barrel as Use Cached Recipes?

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

Sorry, got kinda consumed by a non-minecraft project for a while. How stable are the dev builds at this point? Is it still hazardous to attempt on our server?

@Sunconure11
Copy link
Contributor

They are safe to use at this point on a server. I'm running it fine on a server, if anything, I'm having issues with Stellar Sky, which I need to wait for the dev to respond back on.

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 On 42bf692, and i'm still seeing similar behavior with B:"Use Cached Recipes?"=false

When I mouseover the progress arrow on the left, I can see it oscillate between 1 and 2 for the progress (out of 24000)

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

IceDragon200 commented Apr 28, 2016

@esotericist D8< These dreaded fluid pipes are wrecking my barrel beyond usage!

Okay, Extra Utilities and Thermal Dynamics right? (goes to pick up a deobjf build for both)

What versions are you running for both?

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

esotericist commented Apr 28, 2016

@IceDragon200 Those are the ones.

Notably, they were both mainly written by the same person (RWTema) so it's not terribly surprising in retrospect that if one of them is doing something pathological, the other might be doing the same.

Sorry about all the trouble. :( But it seems like since I haven't heard about/encountered any other mods having this grade of trouble with either of those fluid transport options, it logically SHOULD be resolvable. Somehow.

... I hope?

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 Oh, versions. Didn't see you ask that question earlier. It's: 1.2.12 for Extra Utilities, and 1.2.0B2-169 for thermal dynamics.

IceDragon200 added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 29, 2016
@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Well sorry it took so long, I derped, and derped real hard, but, everything should be fixed in the new dev build, give it a spin :)

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 Oh dear. Giving it a try soon.

Is the cached recipes setting still pertinent?

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist Shouldn't matter anymore 3:

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

Yeah. Confirmed that everything works just as it should both with and without that setting. I think we can call it good. Thanks for your perseverance!

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

... I didn't mean to close this. Misclick. Should probably stay open until 2.6.0 releases proper.

@esotericist esotericist reopened this Apr 30, 2016
@Sunconure11
Copy link
Contributor

Uh, if it has been fixed, then it should be closed.

@IceDragon200
Copy link
Member

@esotericist I'll add it to the bugfixes list on the 2.6.0 release page, so we can close it

@esotericist
Copy link
Author

@IceDragon200 @Sunconure11 Alright. I'm used to organizations where issues aren't closed until they're resolved, and 'resolved' is generally not considered to be the case until it's user-facing in a stable release. Since that's not how you guys do it, I'll try to remember in the future.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants