So it does not make sense to compare the traces from 4.0 and 4.1, they'll be
different...
Andras
-----Original Message-----
From: omn...@googlegroups.com [mailto:omn...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Andras Varga
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 11:12 AM
To: omn...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [Omnetpp-l] Same seeds different results in OMNET++4.0 and 4.1
There shouldn't be any difference in general. The difference might also be
caused by some uninitialized variable or similar.
First I'd find out where the simulations start to diverge (if they diverge
at all, and the difference is not only in statistics collection). A good way
is to turn on eventlog recording in both the 4.0 and 4.1 versions, and
compare them with some diff tool (e.g. meld). Then you'll have some idea
where to look or start debugging (which event number etc -- those are the
"E" lines in the elog file; see
http://omnetpp.org/doc/omnetpp41/manual/usman.html#sec497).
hope this helps
Andras
Hello all,
Best regards,
Luís
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"omnetpp" group.
To post to this group, send email to omn...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/omnetpp?hl=en.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"omnetpp" group.
To post to this group, send email to omn...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/omnetpp?hl=en.
When i mentioned in my post that i was analysing the scalars i meant
to say vectors. I record the slot selection of my protocol in a
vector.
In my protocol i use a uniform distribution for the slot selection
mechanism .
In omnet 4.0 for a certain seed the node chooses a certain set of
values for the slot selection mechanism and for the omnet++ 4.1 the
same node with the same seed chooses a different set of values for the
slot selection mechanism.
this happens because of the bugfix described above?