Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Eternal ElementIDs

  1. #1
    Moderator snowyweston's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    C.LONDON
    Posts
    4,466
    Current Local Time
    01:41 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Eternal ElementIDs

    So I've recently started to think the age of my template might be a concern - at least - in the sense that our ElementIDs are MASSIVE.

    Example #1: the first detail line drawn on a fresh off-of-template model is #16026438. The same, from no-template, is #2490.

    Perhaps it makes no difference?

    Example #2: In a year-old model, pre-planning, 500-home mixed-resi. development, new IDs are well north of 30M+


    Q. Anyone ever seen/read/tested/proved there's anything to my suspicions?

  2. #2
    Member pivoarch's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 16, 2011
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    375
    Current Local Time
    08:41 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I don't have anything to confirm or deny your conspiracy theory. How would you go about fixing this though? Start a new template from scratch?

  3. #3
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,257
    Current Local Time
    07:41 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    So, age itself isnt incrementing the Element ID's, of course.

    The amount of tasks/commands/objects done IN the template will, naturally. Begets the question of how often is someone in the template, and what are they doing in there? (Not asked as an accusatory question: genuinely wondering if all of the commands and tasks in the template are value adding, or if they were just experiments, etc).

    My current Template is 5 years old, currently.

    My Template at my previous office was over 10. While i dont have an exact age count, i THINK it was close to 14 years old. It had some minor ailments, but all were fixable and were not confirmed to be attached to age or upgrading. Certainly, "corrupt elements" that happen in a Revit File have a higher chance of happening, if a file is a decade old, versus 2 months old. Simple logic says if a file is in existence ten times longer, there is ten times more propensity for something to go wrong.

    I still have a copy of the "old" template, and there are no oddities that i would say would stop me from carrying them on year to year.

    I hadnt actually looked at the Element ID counts, so i just looked, as i am (now) curious. First Detail Line drawn in mine = 12130779. :shrug:

  4. #4
    Moderator cellophane's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 9, 2011
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    6,388
    Current Local Time
    08:41 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    An occasional audit of the template can help also.

    From a discussion I had with one of the devs:
    Can / should template files (RTE) be audited?
    They can be, but I’d only audit once after you set them up or after a major change, unlike my recommendation to run audit often (once every two weeks or so) against active development projects.
    How does Compact Model relate to Audit?
    Compact model is on save and audit is on open. So compact only serves to speed up the model, whereas audit tries to do a bunch of checks and fixes.

  5. #5
    Moderator snowyweston's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    C.LONDON
    Posts
    4,466
    Current Local Time
    01:41 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by pivoarch View Post
    How would you go about fixing this though? Start a new template from scratch?
    Fairly surely it'd be the only way - as one can't "reset" the IDs (I've always wondered why there's not some kind of defrag-like utility for Revit project iles)


    Quote Originally Posted by Twiceroadsfool View Post
    Begets the question of how often is someone in the template, and what are they doing in there?
    General - persistent - development.

    Content comes and goes, things get made, unmade, and the (ElementID) counter keeps ticking...


    This .rte past the 6 year mark a few months back - was planning a fresh rebuild for 2019 but that landed too abruptly (as a project requirement) so, maybe it's time I install 2020 and start over. Of course, that'll rubbish any option of a useful A/B compare.

  6. #6
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,257
    Current Local Time
    07:41 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    I guess (for me) the real question is: What will you gain? Lower Element ID's? Or is there a performance issue right now that you are trying to mitigate?

    FWIW im in my template all the time, which is why i can imagine the number is high on mine too. But it still performs great in projects, so i cant even come close to justifying rebuilding it, even with all the automation tools i have to help do it.

  7. #7
    Moderator snowyweston's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 21, 2010
    Location
    C.LONDON
    Posts
    4,466
    Current Local Time
    01:41 PM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Same.

    Not after lower ElementIDs for the sake of it - not by any stretch - it was more, I guess:

    Does a computer (read: Revit) have a harder time doing it's thing with datsets of long integers, than with shorter ones?

    I mean, surely, computationally, "12130779+16026438" taxes more than "1+1", no?
    (I know they're not used in addition, but you get me)

  8. #8
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,257
    Current Local Time
    07:41 AM

    Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Yeah. For sure. I wish there was a good way to truly test it, as it would be interesting to see the results. I dont know of a good way that would be scientifically objective, though.

  9. #9
    Moderator Robin Deurloo's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 7, 2011
    Location
    Rotterdam, Holland
    Posts
    1,682
    Current Local Time
    02:41 PM

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Wouldn't the RFO benchmark be of any use. I mean run the test with the standard files to get numbers and run the same test on that file where you copied and deleted A LOT of stuff just to get the ID's up?

  10. #10
    Administrator Twiceroadsfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 7, 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    11,257
    Current Local Time
    07:41 AM

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    IN theory. But the RFO bench is so lightweight anyway. i question if it would ever display meaningful changes, and how much would BE a meaningful change? IE a few seconds variance? You can see a few second variance just in 5 runs, on the same exact setup.

    So youd need to edit the files from the RFO bench to have 10 million EID's, and then hope or expect to see differences in performance to validate.

    Then we get in to: Size of resulting file (complexity, number of components) vs resulting file being exact same size. For instance, i have 12m EID's, but theres also a **** ton of stuf fin my template. Im SURE when i start a project, it behaves slightly slower than OOTB. But i consider OOTB a useless metric of comparison, since that file is all but worthless at delivering work. Similarly, the files used in the RFO nehc arent *real.* So, how different would a real template be, vs a template with 10 million ID's but that is still a real template?

    I had hoped to one day make the RFO journals run within my template, but its no small amount of work. Even the changes Gordon made to get all of the recent versions built, is awestriking to me, because its a massive time sink. I dont believe just copying and deleting a bunch of stuff ni the file will give you a real metric.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 28th, 2016, 09:45 PM
  2. Eternal wishlist Items Thread
    By sdbrownaia in forum Architecture and General Revit Questions
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: April 28th, 2015, 05:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •