A question for Airnav. Why does Radarbox maintain a lock on the navdata database for so long?
Some background. I'm testing an addon that attempts to DELETE and INSERT routes into the routes table. But this regularly encounters a locked navdata database.
So, is there some problem with the way Radarbox is using SQLite to use the database. Surely ANRB should only lock the navdata database briefly to do an update, and then release the lock.
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1160/5150911880_26723d3187_o_d.jpg)
Okay, this definately looks like a bug.
From this screenshot of the database files, you can see that, as at 12:08pm, ANRB has had a lock on the navdata.db3 database since 11:17am.
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1243/5150485215_0e00f3faac_o_d.jpg)
Any attempt to update any tables in the navdata.db3 database fail with "Database is locked" error.
(http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1226/5151103926_03c74859d3_o_d.jpg)
This is a major problem for any addons that attempt to update the ANRB database(s), and needs an urgent fix. This may also finally explain the problem that some users have with ANRB taking so long to close down on exit, waiting for ANRB to commit all these database updates.
Usually this only happens when the files are in program files and under UAC control of windows but I assume that won't be the case here. We will investigate this.
Also please be aware at no stage during development did we assume that details would be written to the database from outside the RadarBox application.
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 06, 2010, 12:51:03 PMUsually this only happens when the files are in program files and under UAC control of windows but I assume that won't be the case here. We will investigate this.
Yes, it's installed at P:\AirNav Systems\AirNav RadarBox\ where the P: drive is a separate FAT32 partition.
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 06, 2010, 12:51:03 PMAlso please be aware at no stage during development did we assume that details would be written to the database from outside the RadarBox application.
Understood. I'll tell the author of FD7 that we may have to wait to get FD7 route lookup working with Radarbox.
Quote from: tarbat on November 06, 2010, 01:17:35 PM
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 06, 2010, 12:51:03 PMAlso please be aware at no stage during development did we assume that details would be written to the database from outside the RadarBox application.
Understood. I'll tell the author of FD7 that we may have to wait to get FD7 route lookup working with Radarbox.
Think I'll check the stables again Tarbat.
Quote from: bratters on November 06, 2010, 04:40:42 PMThink I'll check the stables again Tarbat.
Or maybe not. We may be near to a solution...............
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/5173801353_658507d2f8_d.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tarbat/5173801353/sizes/o/in/photostream/)
Well now, that's a step forward and no mistake. Bring it on!
Two questions for the moment: 1/ in this example had DAL178 been routeless, the correct info in the top bar would still have appeared? and 2/ the incorrect version will nevertheless still be shown on the onscreen map?
A great improvement but (and without wishing to sound in any way churlish) the fact that we may have two conflicting interpretations of the same Flight ID on the same page serves to highlight even more - were that possible - the utter stupidity of the current situation.
It will also highlight the true extent of the problem.
Quote from: bratters on November 14, 2010, 09:34:37 AMA great improvement but (and without wishing to sound in any way churlish) the fact that we may have two conflicting interpretations of the same Flight ID on the same page serves to highlight even more - were that possible - the utter stupidity of the current situation.
This is an early beta of FlightDisplay for Radarbox, not something built-in to ANRB. I'm sure I'll have more to say once the author finalises this release following beta testing.
Although, back on topic, we'll always have the problem that an external program (eg FlightDisplay) cannot update the routes table in the ANRB database while ANRB is running. So, getting the route populated into the database and ANRB display will require a shutdown/restart of ANRB.
Chris, be sure to let us know when flight display becomes available for Radarbox. I for one will want to purchase it.
Alan
Quote from: Runway 31 on November 14, 2010, 10:58:13 AM
Chris, be sure to let us know when flight display becomes available for Radarbox. I for one will want to purchase it.
Alan
Me too Alan (cost permitting) but let us not forget that we shall be paying for something we expected to get for nothing.
Bratters,
We think that's a harsh comment. You are getting routes from FlightStats and our Server algorithm which was a considerable cost to us. While yes we agree that there some issues with the routes but they are not all wrong, and these issues will be investigated and rectified.
No other competitor even dares to attempt to provide routes/aircraft details because the task isn't easy and it will never provide 100% accurate results (not even 99% in many cases)
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 14, 2010, 05:54:55 PMNo other competitor even dares to attempt to provide routes/aircraft details because the task isn't easy and it will never provide 100% accurate results (not even 99% in many cases)
And even FD7 can't get near 100% resolution of all routes - Notably Loganair :( But it can correct a lot of routes that are currently wrong in the Airnav database, since it gets them from 5 different sources.
The problems Airnav have with their route look up as well as missing alphanumeric flight numbers is well documented. Using FD7 helps with resolving some routes, while it is a very good tool it is only as good as the sites it uses. Many sites do not have a complete list of alphanumeric flight numbers. In fact I currently have COA19 on my list which is EGLL-KEWR not EGKK-KEWR that is being returned by the sites FD7 is using, this is not the only COA flight today that has been shown to originate from EGKK instead of EGLL.
I am certainly not intending to criticize FD7 or the look up sites used but point out that this problem is not easily solved and you have to do the leg work to resolve routes for your Routes Table.
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 14, 2010, 05:54:55 PM
Bratters,
We think that's a harsh comment. You are getting routes from FlightStats and our Server algorithm which was a considerable cost to us. While yes we agree that there some issues with the routes but they are not all wrong, and these issues will be investigated and rectified.
No other competitor even dares to attempt to provide routes/aircraft details because the task isn't easy and it will never provide 100% accurate results (not even 99% in many cases)
A harsh comment? Certainly no intention to offend, merely a reflection of the current position.
Firstly, let me say I would thoroughly recommend RB to any prospective buyer in terms of the design and operation of the box, the aerial, the screen displays and, contrary to some opinion, the reliablity. On the odd occasion I have had a problem, it was quickly sorted and I rate the performance of my box very highly.
Not so the databases however. These have deteriorated over the past two years. In your own words " No other competitor even dares to attempt to provide routes/aircraft details because the task isn't easy..."
Exactly so; it isn't easy and if you don't keep constantly on top of your databases -
right on top of them - they soon get way behind and suddenly you've got major a problem on your hands - both in terms of catching up and keeping up.
As I don't particularly want to be slung off the forum as a "malcontent", I have no desire to get into an argument about the extent of the current difficulties so let's just stick to the facts.
"Database Update Requests" is now on its 103rd page and the behind the scenes work regarding "Routing" has also been - and continues to be - substantial.
All this activity poses an obvious question: if things are more or less hunky dory, why do so many members consider it necessary to put vast amounts of their time into efforts to correct their databases? moreover, why are some members now apparently prepared to consider buying data? Why indeed are database topics so prominent on the forum?
We've all paid our £400 for our boxes (plus a load for aerials) so with that investment, we need them to work - even if we have to pay out some more to do it.
Harsh doesn't come into it - it's simply how things stand.
Quote from: Runway 31 on November 14, 2010, 10:58:13 AMChris, be sure to let us know when flight display becomes available for Radarbox. I for one will want to purchase it.
Note that the current version of FD7 for PP/SBS1 is free.
bratters,
We agree with most of what you said. Let me just clarify some points however. We have never said things are "hunky dory" with the database. If you view our posts we have apologised many times and mentioned it is being redsigned for the next version.
Each version is an evolution on the next, since we first released RadaBox we didn't even a GAS link for Aircraft Details, or FlightStats routes, they were all static back then. Since then sources have been added in, aircraft database team and now with the new version a new database to handle changes better. We totally agree that this needs to be rectified to move onto the next step and that's what we are endeavouring to do.
However we do feel some people feel some of the data appears from thin air and should be right 100% of time.
As we said in the reply to your post we thought it was harsh comment as the routes displayed are coming from a source (its not like we have turned it off). Yes improvement should be made as we indicated in that post though your post indicated we weren't even providing a routes service.
Hope that explains things. Also you won't be "slung off the forum", the only forum users who have that to them are ones who have hidden agendas on this forum and offend other users.
Quote from: AirNav Support on November 14, 2010, 09:31:25 PM
However we do feel some people feel some of the data appears from thin air and should be right 100% of time.
With all due respect, when I purchased my ANRB at considerable cost, I thought it would simply plug in and work. I thought it would work at 100% or at best, 99%. I had no idea about databases having these problems. Bratters says that the databases have deteriorated over the past two years! Why is this happening?
Tailwinds,
That quote was about the database content not anything else about RadarBox.
To put it in perspective you have 100,000+ Aircraft Database and a 100,000+ Routes Database, each day you could have 500 changes or additions. There is no one single source for this data in fact there are 1,000s of sources and many may conflict each other. For that reason the database will never be 100% accurate.
The database issues are as below which will be addressed, we won't go into them in detail as they have been discussed on the forum:
- Routes/Aircraft Updating local database
- Alphanumeric Routes (requres lookup tables)
- Conflicting data
- Aircraft & Route data refreshed on the server from correct sources
These issues are being worked on, and we will continue to strive to reach as close as possible to 100% :)