Spruce does not seem to be growing in Taiga Hills / acacia not growing in deserts

[ghost]

https://www.reddit.com/r/Civcraft/comments/2mzr1c/civcraft_changelog_for_20141121/cm92alq

tldr; spruce reportedly not growing in taiga hills. Game reports 8% growth rate, but still stuck at saplings out of hundreds of trees. Similarly, growing acacia in desert seems to have similar issue.

[WildWeazel]

This is pretty puzzling, the reported rate is the same number used to check if growth events succeed and I verified locally that acacia at least were growing correctly.

[ghost]

Hmm, seems that he is also seeing issues with wheat not growing in mushroom biomes.

On 11/21/2014 02:30 PM, Travis Christian wrote:

This is pretty puzzling, the reported rate is the same number used to check if growth events succeed and I verified locally that acacia at least were growing correctly.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-64024731

[ttk2]

can someone confirm this is universal?

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Dr. Andrew Jawa notifications@github.com wrote:

Hmm, seems that he is also seeing issues with wheat not growing in mushroom biomes.

On 11/21/2014 02:30 PM, Travis Christian wrote:

This is pretty puzzling, the reported rate is the same number used to check if growth events succeed and I verified locally that acacia at least were growing correctly.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:

https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-64024731

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-64026005 .

[WildWeazel]

@ttk2 can you do another diff of the live config vs the one here?

[ttk2]

they are identical a diff produces nothing.

On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Travis Christian notifications@github.com wrote:

@ttk2 https://github.com/ttk2 can you do another diff of the live config vs the one here?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-64095832 .

[rourke750]

@WildWeazel Has this been fixed?

[WildWeazel]

From what I saw in CIvTesters, Acacia was fine and Spruce was inconclusive, maybe @drjawa has more

[rourke750]

I'm going to close this in the mean time. If it is brought up again we can reopen.

[staygroovy57]

@WildWeazel Do you need me to do anything else with regards to testing on this?

Regarding Spruce in Taiga Hills, this is an existing tree farm that used to work for a long time, and the problem seems to have started occurring around the same time that the Dark Oak and Acacia "growth-in-any-biome" bugs were fixed.

[WildWeazel]

@staygroovy57 get @drjawa to check out the location, we've had sporadic reports of this but never able to verify

[ttk2]

whats the location?

On Fri Feb 20 2015 at 5:08:44 PM Travis Christian notifications@github.com wrote:

@staygroovy57 https://github.com/staygroovy57 get @drjawa https://github.com/drjawa to check out the location, we've had sporadic reports of this but never able to verify

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-75336364 .

[staygroovy57]

@ttk2 >whats the location?

As listed in the new issue I had started coords are: -11500 -9250 (79)

For the sake of eliminating confusion, and since this one has been reopened what should I do with this new issue I had created?

[ttk2]

just close it, we want to keep the issue with the most contex

On Sat Feb 21 2015 at 12:07:14 PM staygroovy57 notifications@github.com wrote:

As listed in the new issue I had started coords are: -11500 -9250 (79)

For the sake of eliminating confusion, and since this one has been reopened what should I do with this new issue I had created?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-75383998 .

[staygroovy57]

Hello "Six Months ago"... been patiently waiting for this to be looked at. Now is the time!

[ttk2]

well someone needs to submit a pull.

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 8:57 PM staygroovy57 notifications@github.com wrote:

Hello "Six Months ago"... been patiently waiting for this to be looked at. Now is the time!

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-103298240 .

[WildWeazel]

Still no proof of either not growing correctly. I need a screenshot with debug (F3) enabled and the chat message showing the rate for the item in your hand.

Now someone is saying that the taiga biome is very rare, another reason to grow spruce in ice mountains. No idea how accurate that is.

[staygroovy57]

@WildWeazel Here is the "proof" you requested.

It should be noted that:

• it clearly says 'TaigaHills' (not 'Taiga', where spruce grows just fine, thank you very much)
• spruce used to grow as expected in this area before whatever changes were made around the time Dark Oak and Acacia were finally edited into the RB config.

Additionally, the Taiga biome comment fro 'someone' about them being rare would seem to arguably come from a person who hasn't traveled the map and explored very much. I beg to differ, there are plenty of them all over the place, but some may be called different things. Like for example the one NW of Orion is called 'Ice Plains' IIRC?

[WildWeazel]

Huh, so there it is. That matches what the config says, but their behavior doesn't match the reported rate. I wonder if there is some nuance to vanilla spruce behavior in Taiga Hills specifically? Both of the large spruce types also grow at 8% in Taiga, so those shouldn't affect it.

BTW Ice Plains/Mountains, sometimes referred to as Tundra, are a distinct biome type and configured separately, under our "cold" category but not "cold forest"

[staygroovy57]

Spruce used to grow there perfectly is all I can say.

As far as 'Taiga' biomes, thanks for clarifying the detail about 'ice plains' (I was merely trying to use this as an example - obviously not such a good choice on my end)

Now on to acacia in desert (only thing is: that problem is at level 235, although I have trees growing fine at other sky farms in other biomes like Jungle, this one doesn't)

[WildWeazel]

Since trees are not persisted it's entirely possible that some vanilla rule introduced in an update is preventing them from attempting to grow in certain locations.

[staygroovy57]

@WildWeazel Here is a link to a screenshot showing the desert biome area where acacia doesn't appear to be growing. Note that this was taken at level 235, but nothing leads me to believe that there are limitations in place preventing trees from growing at that height.

At the risk of repeating myself, these bugs were only introduced whenever the 'dark oak and acacia can grow everywhere' issue was patched with a fix. Spruce was growing just fine in 'TaigaHills' before that. The point I am making is that I do not believe that this bug fix was coincidental with any MC server upgrades, and therefore would appear unlikely to be related to any vanilla rule changes since no moving to a new server version happened when this spruce and acacia bug was introduced.

[WildWeazel]

Thanks. Looking at the config, rates should be as follows:

Acacia Desert, desert hills 8% Plains 4% All others 0%

Dark Oak Swamp 8% Forest, forest hills 4% Taiga, taiga hills 2% All others 0%

I wonder if there are any other exceptions to this. I'd also like to see if we can reproduce this on Civtest with the same config, because when this first came up some testers were saying it was fine.

[ttk2]

should I sync up this config with the civtest one?

[WildWeazel]

do a diff between Civcraft and Civtest, out of curiosity

[ghost]

< #persistent_growth_period: 24

persistent_growth_period: 24

Only changes that came up aside from database stuff.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 4:13 AM, Travis Christian notifications@github.com wrote:

do a diff between Civcraft and Civtest, out of curiosity

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Civcraft/RealisticBiomes/issues/8#issuecomment-113360457 .

[staygroovy57]

@WildWeazel Very sorry, been rather busy IRL and haven't had much time to go on Civtest to find desert and TaigaHills biomes and try this out. I tried again and couldn't easily find any... Anyone know where either of these are on the current Civtest map?

[ttk2]

no clue, how bad would it be to regen the map to try and find some? I guess I could map it.

[idoash4]

@ttk2 don't regen the map please it took us quite a bit of time to build all the factories. I will try looking for the biome in the current map.

[ttk2]

will do.

[benjajaja]

While refactoring for persistent trees I found a bug where bukkit returns the wrong TreeType from saplings. This means that this issue is probably fixed, @staygroovy57 can you test again now?

[staygroovy57]

@gipsy-king While I was hoping to give you good news, I am sad to report that not a single tree grew in that area since I started AFK'ing it about 40 minutes ago. I do have another tree farm in a 'Taiga' biome and it doesn't suffer from this issue, only 'TaigaHills'

I believe that Realistic Biomes does not associate 'Taiga Hills' properly to what it should be, somehow.

[benjajaja]

Spot on, looks like we have TAIGA and TAIGA_HILLS, but we're missing TAIGA_MOUNTAINS in the config for cold and cold_forest.

Edit: the same is probably happening with DESERT_MOUNTAINS

[WildWeazel]

Aren't those new 1.8 biomes? Our map is from the 1.6 era.

[benjajaja]

Mhh yea looks like 1.8. Could they still appear on our map from a chunk corruption/reset?

[staygroovy57]

@gipsy-king The problem appears to have started at the same time that the dark oak and acacia trees were fixed in RB config (Fall 2014), which is way before we moved to 1.8

[benjajaja]

I found a TaigaHills biome in civtest, reports that redwood can grow. I'll report back after 3 hours.

[WildWeazel]

8 hours ago

@gipsy-king has died of hypothermia

[benjajaja]

after unfreezing myself, the redwood tree has grown in TaigaHills on civtest.

[benjajaja]

@staygroovy57 or anyone, got coords of a TaigaHills biome on the main server, to try to reproduce there since it doesn't reproduce on civtest?

[staygroovy57]

@gipsy-king The coords were in the screenshot I gave @WildWeazel

They are -11,500 (78) -9258

@Goldmattress says he looked at it and it's fixed!! Yeah!

[Goldmattress]

I checked, this appears to be fixed with the latest persistence update appears to have fixed it

[benjajaja]

Now I'm getting infinite time on the civcraft.co test server (I think that one was only temporary for 1.8.7?) for redwood in TaigaHills.

Closing since it seems to be fixed on main, reopen if necessary.

[ttk2]

the civtest server still shows that old issues where leaving RB alone for a long amount of time will cause it to lose DB connection, so that might be causing some strange behavior over there if you don't restart before doing much serious testing.

[ProgrammerDan]

That's no bueno, is there a keep-alive on the connection? I'll have to look into it, all the DB code needs gutting and replacing.

[benjajaja]

That shouldn't affect getting the rate when hitting a block though

[ttk2]

@ProgrammerDan , @rourke750 plans to move all DB stuff into Civmod core and all the plugins just go through it for DB usage, should like a plan?

@gipsy-king probably not, its running the same config as prod though AFIK, try changing it out if its suspect.

[staygroovy57]

I just went to the second location I had reported which was a desert biome and acacias are finally growing there as well! So it would appear as if these problems have been eradicated.

I would love to actually understand why the bug stopped acting up the way it was.

Thanks to all concerned for staying on top of the issue. It had become more of an urgent one now that saplings are needed in XP recipes, of course.

Incidentally, it feels a bit odd that I may have been the only person to ever try growing acacia trees in the desert

[ProgrammerDan]

@staygroovy57 Goodsprings outside MTA grows Acacia extensively in their desert, have for months. I used to buy them out quicker then they could harvest.

@ttk2 Tempered, but yes. I know some swank enterprise-level patterns for Generic DAO that I can embed in Civmod Core, including all the connection pooling and over icky stuff that new and old devs hate dealing with. Then each plugin could deal with Data Objects, instead of database calls (unless they really, really want to). They'd define their "data schema" simply as the primitives they are interested in and relationships between them, the DAO core patterns would do the rest. We'll see how it works out.

[ttk2]

@ProgrammerDan cool stuff is cool, but changing the existing plugins that much is a big overhaul if it does not amount to large performance/simplicity improvements over just having them let someone else manage the connection and they just send queries.

[ProgrammerDan]

@ttk2 Reasonable. I'd definitely focus on the connection handling first. The DAO stuff is more than just cool, it's the "right way" to do things, but I get where you are coming from.