Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

External exception EEFFACE

1,110 views
Skip to first unread message

Luis Valdeón

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

Hi:


I have a program that produce an exception when running in a certain
conditions ( more
than 8 instances executing at the same time ). The exception is fired at
differents parts of the
code and is not catght with a try {} catch ( only with an
TApplication->OnExcepction handler ).

The exception code is:

External exception EEFFACE

The tests are being made in a Pentium 130 MHz with 64 Mb running NT 40
Wkts.
I will apreciate any suggestion about the problem.

Thanks in advance.

--
Luis Valdeón
AUDATEX ESPAÑA, S.A.
lvaldeons.aud...@nexo.es

para contestar quitar BORRAR
remove BORRAR to email me

Mark Cashman

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

Is it possible you've run out of disk space or memory?

EEFFACE is usually some sort of external device error.
--
------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman
- Original digital art, writing, and more -
C++ Builder Tips and The C++ Builder Programmer's Webring (Join us!)
http://www.geocities.com/~mcashman/progwork.htm
------

Biff The Wonder Dog

unread,
Jun 4, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/4/98
to

Luis Valdeón wrote in message <01bd8fb4$96ba02e0$ff00a8c0@luis>...
>
> External exception EEFFACE
>
Are you working with an Access database? There's some sort of problem with
catching this exception in the IDE. If you run the program outside of the
IDE, then this exception could just go away. There's a ton of posts on this
in the database newsgroup. Try looking it up with dejanews.

Jerry Bloomfield

unread,
Jun 8, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/8/98
to

On 4 Jun 1998 12:27:07 GMT, "Luis Valdeon"
<lvaldeons.BORRAR...@nexo.es> wrote:

> I have a program that produce an exception when running in a certain
>conditions ( more than 8 instances executing at the same time ). The exception
>is fired at differents parts of the code and is not catght with a try {} catch ( only
>with an TApplication->OnExcepction handler ).
>
> The exception code is:
>
> External exception EEFFACE
>
>The tests are being made in a Pentium 130 MHz with 64 Mb running NT 40
>Wkts. I will apreciate any suggestion about the problem.

As you have probably figgured-out by now, there are several possible
causes for the "EEFACE" exceptions which pop-up from time to time in
Builder.

The most common of these is the MSACCESS driver in the BDE, where the
MS-DAO library DLLs throw exceptions internally, and after a large
number of these exceptions are thrown (and not caught by the internal
handler), the Builder IDE flags the error.

Additionally, if there is a non-"Exception class" exception which is
thrown and not properly handled, the VCL Exception Handler of the
TAppliction class "has a cow" and throws one of these "EEFACE"
exceptions.

So far, about the best suggestion I have seen for dealing with this
is to use th ecall-stack to determine which of your functions the
program was in when the exception was thrown, and try to trace
through your function to determine where the exception is coming from.
Once you are there, then you are left with fixing it (if it is your
code), of contacting the vendor for a fix/solution if it is someone
else's code.

Sorry there isn't much to offer you on this here, but hopefully it
will be of at least a little assistance to you.

Luis Valdeón

unread,
Jun 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM6/12/98
to

Thanks everybody for your help.

I haven't fixed the problem yet but I supose that the problem is the memory
used as Mark has pointed. I don't use MSACCESS, and I can't catch the
exception from the IDE becose it's only thrown when there are more than
five instances of the program executing at the same time. I've run the same
program with the same conditions in a different machine ( W95 ) and I don't
have the same problem ( althought I have a Runtime Error 217 ).

I'm going to try the same program using VCL package libraries ( Builder 3.0
) and I suppose that with less memory used on startup the problem could be
avoided.

0 new messages