Havok4 Early Adopter Program Returns to Second Life

Quick Status

As mentioned in an earlier post, we found an issue with the previous beta version that caused us to revert the initial regions to our standard simulator. That issue, and a set of others, have now been resolved, and we are in the process of re-deploying the new Havok4 Beta simulator to all current participants in the Havok4 Early Adopter Program (please see the linked page for the original announcement and details). I had hoped that we could really surprise you and have the new build deployed yesterday, since one of our team members took it on himself to do the critical fix on Sunday, but it turned out that we had too many folks out of office due to Monday’s partial holiday.

Thank you! We have already reached our original target for the size of this initial mid-scale beta test. We are, however, still accepting new requests for participation.

Today we are back and rolling. The updated Havok4 Beta simulator has been deployed to the Beta Preview, and  to 180 of the 300+ Early Adopter regions. The balance of the regions will be updated tomorrow throughout the day.

What Does It Mean To Be Part Of A Beta Program?

Please note that the Early Adopter Program is a large scale beta test of a new version of the Second Life simulator (server program). When you opt in, you will be using software that is new, and likely still has some rough edges. The good news is that with each release we have resolved a set of important issues. At the same time it is important to remember that the point of this process is to find the problems that we cannot find until we’re running “for real” with real avatars and content.

That means that there is some risk of problems, a risk that we have tried to minimize, but cannot entirely eliminate (if we could, we wouldn’t need to test!). What you get as a benefit of being in the program is the opportunity to try out the new simulator early, help to find the remaining issues, and be directly involved with helping to be sure that the new Second Life simulator will work well supporting your regions before it is rolled out to the whole Second Life Grid.

How Do I Join The Early Adopter Program?

If you own a private island and would like to have your region converted to the beta Havok4-based simulator, please follow the instructions in the program announcement post. (Please do not add a comment here saying “add me!” and expect that your region will be converted just by this post – we will only convert regions based on tickets submitted by the estate owner.)

At the moment a bit over half of the 300+ regions are deployed, and we will update the rest of them by mid-day tomorrow.

Am I In A Havok4 Beta Simulator Region?

You can tell whether you are in a region that is supported by the standard Second Life simulator or the Havok4 Beta simulator by opening Help > About Second Life… in your viewer. The fourth text line will start with one of two strings:

* If the fourth text line starts with “Second Life Server”, then you are in a region supported by the standard Second Life simulator

* If the fourth text line starts with “Havok4 Beta Server”, then you are in a region supported by the Havok4 Beta simulator

What Changed With This Version?

The new build has been deployed to both the Beta Preview and Second Life Early Adopters. Changes in this build include (SVC items were submitted on the public jira issue tracker / DEV items are internally discovered issues):
DEV-8718: llTargetOmega objects now spin without being selected first
DEV-8875: Objects with reduced physics level of detail are now restored correctly
DEV-9054: “Go to” no longer causes avatar to bump the target avatar
DEV-9070: “Allow anyone to move” object permission is now handled correctly
SVC-1178: “Copy selection” no longer leaves a 0.005 gap between prims
SVC-1189: Damage now affects sitting avatars (and a related rare case where the position of a damaging object was in a damage-enabled parcel but the avatar was not – in this case damage is no longer applied)
SVC-1191: Hugger attachments now work as expected (rather than colliding avatars in a surprising way)


Not every problem that you find on a Havok4 region is because of the Havok4 Beta simulator! Second Life is a complex system, and most often at this point, a problem that you see on a Havok4 region is because of some other cause unrelated to the Havok4 physics engine updates. Please tell us about issues you find, but also please try to do the normal troubleshooting that you would do without Havok4 before assuming that the Havok4 Beta simulator is the cause.

How Do I Report A Problem?

To submit a Havok4 bug:
1) Log in to the https://jira.secondlife.com/ page with your Second Life avatar name and password.
2) Click “Create New Issue”
3) Set PROJECT to “2 Second Life Service – SVC” and ISSUE TYPE to “Bug”
4) On the next page, type step-by-step instructions for how to create the problem, and if specific products are involved include the product vendor name and specific product name and version.
5) VERY IMPORTANT: Please set COMPONENTS = “Physics” and AFFECTS VERSIONS = “Havok4 Beta”. If you do not choose these settings, the Havok4 team may not see your bug report for a while!

For a demo of the jira public issue tracker, see Torley’s great video “how to report a bug“. Again, please be sure to set COMPONENTS = “Physics” and AFFECTS VERSIONS = “Havok4 Beta”!

Thanks in advance for helping to test the next generation Second Life simulator. We really appreciate your help in making Second Life better.

One Of Many Projects…

You are hearing a lot about the Havok4 project due to the current stage of the work – but remember that we are but one team of many working hard to improve the reliability and stability of Second Life.

Best regards,

Sidewinder Linden
Havok4 Program Manager

P.S. As usual, please keep your posts on-topic.

This entry was posted in Announcements & News, Bugs & Fixes, Preview Grid. Bookmark the permalink.

91 Responses to Havok4 Early Adopter Program Returns to Second Life

  1. U M says:

    YES! wonderful to see this happening!

  2. Sindy Tsure says:

    Good stuff, Sidewinder!!

    Any ballpark guess on when we’re going to see this on the mainland?

  3. Ann Otoole says:

    I’m impressed. You guys are moving fast with the fixes. Great job!

  4. Sindy Tsure says:

    …also, with people starting to talk about MONO maybe coming to the beta grid soon, got any stats on how Havok4 performs vs what we have today?

  5. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @2 Sindy: We just talked about the mainland question again today. Because it is such a sweeping set of regions, we are likely to wait a bit to evaluate how the first set or two of Early Adopter regions are doing, and then appraise whether we’re ready for the mainland.

    I would like to see most of the vehicles issues straightened out before we roll the mainland as well, which is hopefully “not too far away”, but we aren’t sure how much effort that will take yet.

    The basic path from here is:
    1) Work out any problems we find with Havok4 region startups through the first few hundred regions
    2) Work out the remaining vehicle issues – which are largely problems with complex attachment-based vehicles not behaving correctly
    3) See how much performance optimization is needed and how much we can reasonably do

    So… please don’t assume too much about performance based on the current builds – we haven’t spent a significant amount of time on performance optimization yet, and know several areas that we’ll be targeting once we get to that point.

    By the way… I’m really curious to see what region “capacity” turns out to be once we work on performance a bit. Today, region capacity is mostly based on where the Havok1 simulator crashes. Where is the region capacity limit if the simulator doesn’t crash under load any more? *wink*



  6. Sidewinder Linden says:

    Quick note on DEV-8718: This is a partial fix. There are some cases where rotating child prims will not spin until they are selected… still working on it, but we wanted to get the partial fix into this release. /Sidewinder

  7. Elvis Orbit says:

    Great job! I can`t wait to get home from work and see it on my sim. I have to say your team has gone above normal duty on this. I am very impressed!

  8. Isablan Neva says:

    Movement and flying feels very “jerky” to me. Anybody else?

  9. Kerik Rau says:

    Any chance we can get Crash Me, the Havok4 Combat and the no dmg sandbox back up?

  10. Pingback: The Grid Live » Second Life News for January 24, 2008

  11. Digital Digital says:

    Awesome can’t wait to see it back up and running again on my sim 🙂

  12. JetZep Zabelin says:

    Is there a way we can know which SIMs have opted to beta test Havok?

  13. Elvis Orbit says:

    I don not believe they will posting the names of the private regions with Havok 4 because most of us do not want people coming in and testing them out like a sand box. But open the map and search “Crash Me”. That is a Havok 4 sim run by the Havok4 team on the main grid.

  14. Rocky Merosi says:

    Hey I just wanted to say that today my sim was moved to a havok4 server and I am already seeing a significant change in performance. It is a script heavy sim and I was freezing up about every half hour orso during peak times but I am happy to say I havent froze up at all there since it was converted. Many kudos to the people making this possible. Oh and if you would like a sandbox to test things in on havok4, you can go to my sim The Magic Soapbox. We have a public one there 🙂

  15. Pingback: Massively

  16. Tasrill Sieyes says:

    “Sidewinder Linden Says:

    By the way… I’m really curious to see what region “capacity” turns out to be once we work on performance a bit. Today, region capacity is mostly based on where the Havok1 simulator crashes. Where is the region capacity limit if the simulator doesn’t crash under load any more? *wink*”

    I must say nothing I have heard filled me with both such excitement and dread at the same time. This could be the end of people on mainland unable to get to there homes because of a busy club/camping site/traffic bot farm. And allowing mainland venues to compete with islands ones when they get really busy. But well at the same time I get a vision of the bot farms suddenly having a new race on mainland and islands of even more insanely prolific numbers of bots. Without the fear of locking there customers out of there store well the skys the limit. but no way to stop that unless we get rid of traffic. Bots are here to stay but we can take the insintive away form them putting more strain on the asset server and such.

  17. Sean Heying says:

    I notice my sim has been moved to a new server and my performance tested with the Mysti Performance tester has dropped through the floor (Not a scientific test, but better than nothing)

    I am still Havok 1, must be in the 120 odd regions left, but do you move Sims around to different hosts for the test, and if my performance does drop so much can anything be done?

    I guess I will test tomorrow if SL comes up. 😉

    ((Stay on topic people, yes SL is down))

  18. Shanessa V says:

    But yes… Thank you Matthew for the update. It’s very helpful to know that you are aware of the problem and we are just not stumbling around in the dark *hugs* Well I hope this is just an easy fix and it will be up and running in a short amount of time.

  19. Chalice Yao says:

    ‘SVC-1189: …(and a related rare case where the position of a damaging object was in a damage-enabled parcel but the avatar was not – in this case damage is no longer applied)’

    Weeeeeeeeee. No more unsafe safezones in parcels near damage areas. Perrrfect. Here’s hoping it’ll get deployed in Rausch sooner than later.

  20. Sidewinder Linden says:

    Now that connectivity has been restored… (http://blog.secondlife.com/2008/01/24/difficulties-logging-in-and-connecting-to-secondlifecom/), I’m removing the earlier posts with “I can’t connect” comments to leave space for project-related comments. Please note that you can submit a help request on the support page in case of a connectivty problem, and it will be seen and acted on facter than if it is posted on a “random blog topic that happens to be open at the time”. Regards, Sidewinder

  21. Sidewinder Linden says:

    By the way, I do understand that currently if the main web site is inaccessible, there is not a way to reach the normal support ticketing system. I’ll talk about this internally and see if there is a workable solution to that problem. If the problem is with connectivity through our ISP’s, a separate system would not really help, since when the inbound connection is offline or there is a major datacenter issue, all access is blocked. The blog is still accessible is that it is hosted by a third party in a completely different location. I’ll spend some time discussing this internally, but am not sure that there is a solution that will really affect access through these sorts of issues. /Sidewinder

  22. Ceera Murakami says:

    RE: SVC-1189. Was that the behavior in combat zones before? That sitting on something still left you vulnerable to damage? I suppose for those who want to fight, that it makes sense not to alow such a simple immunity, but for those of us who end up on a damage-evabled area unintentionally, that is dire news.

  23. Alisha says:

    I reported svc 1179 last week. Wow, it is fixed it all ready!! Side, Simon, and the rest of your team, You are the superlative example of a Dev team!!
    I thank all of you for your time, impressive communication and startling progress.

    *happy dances off to find a new pet bug*

  24. Kerik Rau says:

    @ Ceera Murakami
    The issue had to do with the damage system and had a few other bugs associated with it like triggering damage multiple times.

    If combat was reduced to standing room only it would likely degrade into spamming and trying to crash the client over doing actual “combat”. There is no point to just sitting around hurling insults at each other and an entire section of the SL economy would likely die. Besides if you find yourself in a damage enabled zone you can teleport out or move to a different parcel.

  25. Pingback: SLOG

  26. Argent Stonecutter says:

    @24 Kerik – do people still use the Linden damage system? I thought everyone had gone to scripted combat because the Linden system was too easy to ‘game’.

    Sidewinder: what are the problems with attachment-based vehicles? Do they effect attachment-based avatars? Also, if Havok 4 works well, is there a possibility of the basic 15,000 prim per sim quota being increased?

  27. Meade Paravane says:

    Sidewinder, does getting Havok4 vehicles happy include just physics stuff or will it also address things like, for example, letting scripts see ban lines across sim boundaries? There’s a number of bugs (or missing features) that make roaming the grid a real challange…

  28. Argent Stonecutter says:

    I’d rather they fixed the problems of ban lines on sim boundaries altogether… even (ahem) banning them if that’s necessary. The problem’s been nibbled at but not solved, perhaps it’s time to cut the gordian knot and limit access controls to the interior of sims.

  29. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @27 Meade and 28 Argent: Our target for this update is to make the physics engine behave reasonably, and not to add (or substantially change) features. Meade… could you write up a notecard describing the issues that “make roaming the grid a real challenge” and send it to me in-world? Thanks, Sidewinder

  30. Kelly Linden says:

    Just a couple of comments on “Region Capacity”. I disagree with Sidewinder that physics is the primary limiting factor in number of prims in a region. There are other factors that play as important a role or more.

    The Interest List is the logic that decides what data gets sent to what viewers and it’s complexity rises (I think) at a rate of (# updates needed)^(# of agents). So while the biggest factor would be number agents, increasing prim limits significantly could have a notable impact on the simulators performance.

    Viewer frame rates: Even with today’s limits the sheer number of triangles in an average scene is a daunting task to render. The limits on prims help to keep that from becoming an impossible task.

    Simulator memory usage: Every simulator gets ~500MB of RAM. Already heavily scripted areas may pass this soft limit. If they pass it too much they go into swap (storing data on the much slower hard drive) which drastically effects performance. Increasing the number of prims available in a region could cause more and more regions to pass this limit.

    I’m not saying the above issues aren’t without solutions such as code optimizations, better performance monitoring tools for residents to police themselves or even hardware upgrades. I am only pointing out that physics is not the only limiting factor in number of prims in a region.

  31. Kelly Linden says:

    @22 Ceera: Yes, in havok1 agents who are sitting take damage whenever they or the object they are sitting on is hit. There was a bug in the logic that caused the damage to be ignored in this case in havok4 and that is now fixed.

  32. Meade Paravane says:

    TY, Sidewinder!

    I’ll solicit some issues in the forums and send you a summary next week. 🙂

  33. Leffard Lassard says:

    A question has been overseen that would interest me as well.
    What are the names of the beta havok sims on the main grid so that everyone is able to check them out?

  34. Pingback: Mono comes to the Beta grid, Now Very Soon! | PrimForge

  35. Kerik Rau says:

    @ Sidewinder Linden

    I believe that Meade is talking about pathfinding in and across sims. Right now it is a royal pain to figure out which parcels you can cross much less developing a path the object can take through them. You can’t use the parcel information functions to see any attributes across the sim border (it “wraps” from the current sim it seems), so the object may hit a border that it cannot detect.

    Probably the easiest method (for lsl programmers) is to provide a function that returns true or false if the object can move from the vector x to vector y. This would allow people to check paths before executing them and/or finding paths.

  36. Bad Bobbysocks says:

    I don’t know about anyone else but so far I’m totally unimpressed with the havok 4 texture render seems a little quicker but any avatar movements suck bigtime its jerky and incredibly difficult to control flying is a nightmare and tp seems to be off too. I know its beta but I thought the basics would work like simply walking

  37. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @36 Bad; I think this depends strongly on where you are and the state of the region. There are places where the behaviors are notably smoother, and we’ve gotten comments to that effect, and others where people have reported issues. This is exactly the reason that we are doing a mid-scale beta test through this early adopter program – to see what is right and what is not, and resolve the issues before we update the whole system. Regards, Sidewinder

  38. Pingback: Cold Steel - Havok4 Early Adopter at Daikon Forge

  39. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @30 Kelly: I guess this teaches me not to write about complex issues late and tired (Eastern Time :). I can see how what I wrote seems to be statement that physics is *the* primary limit on simulator capacity, but I do not believe that to be true either (and I think you know that’ is not what I think anyway!). In some circumstances, physics load is the limiting factor, but in many others there are a variety of other areas that tend to limit perceived region capacity – and it depends on which metric of “capacity” is the one of interest.

    What I was *trying* for is the concept that many folks today judge “how many avatars can I allow on my region” based on the count at which the region tends to crash. We (meaning really Andrew, you and Simon) have removed many crash modes from the Havok1-based simulator. With those Havok1-based simulator crash modes mostly moved to the historical dust bin, the measure of simulator avatar capacity will now be based on other things, from a region owner perspective – many of which are these other limiting factors that you’ve noted.

    So I guess if I’d proofread one more time I would have said “Today, (region owners’ impression of) region capacity is (often) mostly based on where the Havok1 simulator crashes.”

    Thanks for the clarification,

    Sidewinder (who will reach for another cup of coffee and avoid “personal shorthand” wherever possible when talking about this kind of thing in off the cuff comments from now on! :0)

  40. Paddy Wright says:

    The fact that you have read and responded so may times to the comments warms my heart…too often we see 150 comments and silence from the good Linden peeps…Great job Sidewinder, now sleep!

  41. mant says:

    our regions switched today , i have some exploding barrels i did a test yesterday when it was on havok 1 i rezzed about 50 barrels shot them sim crashed;/ with havok4 i rezzed over 500 exploding barrels shot them sim stayed stable and barley even lagged when they was blowing up this is great i hope i can help to find any hidden bugs to help out.

  42. Ceera Murakami says:

    Well, one sim that I work in was one of three that got switched, and they had to roll one of them back when parts of a football stadium there flew off-world for no reason at all.

    I noticed that in one of the others, I now trip and fall when drossing the low curb on the edge of a sidewalk, which I could easily walk over before. How ungainly…

    My home sim is slated to change over, and may be doing that right now, as I can’t log in. We’ll see how it goes… I hope my castle doesn’t get blown up by the change.

  43. Oceanna Shannon says:

    I’ve found that movement is jerky as well @ #8.

    aving some attachment vehicle related issues as well, but those were known already, and discussed in the last post.

    I’m amazed at the improvement in the operation of our sims. This is going to be a wonderful improvement. I’m already seeing 40-60% performance improvements.


  44. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @43 oceanna: Could you IM me in-world so that I can see what you are talking about? Thanks, Sidewinder (have meetings this afternoon but will try to find a slot either today or tomorrow)

  45. MCM Villiers says:

    Yea, its great! and I agree with Paddy

  46. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @42 Ceera: Those are the kind of problems we are trying to find with this Early Adopter program. The good news is that with over 320 regions converted, we only have a small handful (under 6 iirc) that have these sorts of conversion/startup problems. The team is looking at one of them right now (seriously – right this minute) and has been making good progress on identifying the cause.

    Please jira the trip and fall location with step-by-step on how to reproduce it, marked Component Physics, Affects Version Havok4 Beta.



  47. MCM Villiers says:

    Hey Sidewinder are you guys going to post a list for scripters to try out their vehicles in?

  48. Ceera Murakami says:

    Thanks Sidewinder, I’ll submit full reports. My home sim is also scheduled to go to this program, so I’ll have plenty of chances to see what is strange.

    RUCE 3 was the sim that had the stadium blow up. No Physical prims at all. Nothing the Physics should have treated oddly. Completely normal and static build on the ground, with a few sculpty staircases. (One of the sculpty stairs was among the parts that got sent to my lost and found, even though I was no longer the owner of the parts? I created them, but had already transferred ownership to the cleint.) The only unusual thing in the sim is that at 500, 600 and 700 M up there are three platforms that are made of two 50 x 50 x 1 megaprims each. But they were just fine, as far as I can tell so far. I haven’t rezed the coallesced stuff yet to see for sure what got returned.

  49. Dekka Raymaker says:

    @ 49 Ceera Murakami

    This may be something or not, anyhow on the island I managed one resident had 3 megaprims at high altitudes similar heights to yours and on his parcel items belonging to other people started to get returned, I told him to remove the megaprims and the problem stopped (this is Havoc 1). But I guess I must also point out there were other items I asked him to remove also, temp rezzers.

  50. Ceera Murakami says:

    Thanks Dekka. the thing is, that sim’s been perfectly stable for a week or more, since I finished the Stadium and turned it over to the client. We’ve been watching it carefully to see if the megaprims caused any issues at all. I will report them as a possible factor in my report on todays problems, though.

  51. Ryu Darragh says:

    #49 Ceera. I have had odd returns like that only twice since I started SL and I don’t think the physics engines have anything to do with it. Objects are “Owned” and “Created” as two entries in each objects record in the Asset Servers database. There is every chance that the same asset insanity that struck “ABC Island” some time ago has happened whereby either another user with return power made a booboo, or the system had a hiccough and the reset during the software change did it. Either way, if the objects can’t be returned to the “Owner”, they *might* go back to the “Creator” if the owner is now a “Group”.

  52. Justkickzazz Taurog says:

    “@2 Sindy: We just talked about the mainland question again today. Because it is such a sweeping set of regions, we are likely to wait a bit to evaluate how the first set or two of Early Adopter regions are doing, and then appraise whether we’re ready for the mainland.

    I would like to see most of the vehicles issues straightened out before we roll the mainland as well, which is hopefully “not too far away”, but we aren’t sure how much effort that will take yet.

    Ooof…this didn’t go down too well with me Sidewinder.
    The way you wrote implies to the ‘un/malinformed’ user that you’d rather have your “paying” clients sims go through the ‘hassle’ of ironng out those edges & nudges instead of your own ones.

    Could those lines be another classic case of
    “Sidewinder (who will reach for another cup of coffee and avoid “personal shorthand” wherever possible when talking about this kind of thing in off the cuff comments from now on! :0)”


    Apart from that I’m experiencing the avatar movement jerkiness as well when turning (rotating the ava’s directions).

  53. Ric Mollor says:

    —————–Kelly Linden said—————-

    Simulator memory usage: Every simulator gets ~500MB of RAM. Already heavily scripted areas may pass this soft limit. If they pass it too much they go into swap (storing data on the much slower hard drive) which drastically effects performance. Increasing the number of prims available in a region could cause more and more regions to pass this limit.

    Surely this isn’t true. At nearly $300 USD (times 4 per server!) monthly it would seem that the servers could be beefed up with more RAM. That certainly would be an extremely cost effective upgrade.

  54. Elvis Orbit says:

    I was a bit jerky at first on my sim as well but I did a reboot and things where fine. Then 20 mins later I thought the sim crashed. Turned out to be the whole grid. Then I went Thank God it was not a bug in the sim LOL

  55. Oceanna Shannon says:

    Gladly! and done Sidewinder 🙂

    My problem is the turning issue as well. I fixed it by removing the banking settings from my vehicle and tweaking the turning rate modifiers in my script.


  56. Sean Heying says:

    Ive noted that my Physics time as reported on View|Statistics bar lists 3.2ms where it used to list 0.2ms. Can anyone confirm before I start to debug it for a Jira entry?

    A closed group where the Region Owner can nominate a person to be joined would be a nice thing Sidewinder so we could discuss issues between ourselves.

  57. Sean Heying says:

    Turned out to be Wavemaker Rock by Heather Goodliffe. I will debug and Jira it as much as I can.

  58. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @53 Justkickzazz: I’m not sure what you are trying to get at. Actually the reason for avoiding the mainland is the reverse of your commentary.

    We are allowing anyone who wants to opt-in, and purposefully not forcing anyone, to be involved in the early large scale beta of the new simulator. One reason to *not* do the mainland is that there are no estate owners, and thus no one in particular who could make the decision to opt-in. It doesn’t seem fair to me or other to force folks on mainland regions to be part of this process without opting in, since we all know there are issues with beta software.

    In addition the mainland is a very large area. We are not yet sure that we should convert that large a portion of Second Life, given that we are still working out vehicle and performance issues.


  59. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @57 Sean: We are just now starting to look at performance optimizations and taking care of differences like that. We have noticed higher physics time in some cases, and that is not in itself necessarily bad. We already have a set of reference regions that we are using for performance tuning, however we are not yet fully targeting that issue yet. There are still some vehicle issues that are getting focus before we work the rest of performance tuning. Thsnks, Sidewinder

  60. Argent Stonecutter says:

    How close is the behavior of Havok4 to the final behavior? There are HUGE problems with Cyberflight (used in my Flight Feather, and in several third-party wings, flight packs, and the like) in Havok4. When I noticed the problem originally I was told that there was no point in tuning it for Havok4. These problems are persisting – should I report them as a bug or should I try to deal with them?

  61. Elvis Orbit says:

    @ 62
    I would check the Jira to see if it is there and if not I would report it.

  62. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @61 Argent: As mentioned before we just started working on vehicle issues in the last week or so, so it is not surprising that they have persisted to this point. Please report specific problems, in particular the LSL calls involved, or if you are not the maker of the vehicle, the specific manufacturer and model of vehicle with a step by step process for how we can reproduce the bad behavior (with what it should do if corrected). These should be reported in the public jira issue tracker, marked with Component PHYSICS and Affects Version HAVOK4 BETA in order to get seen by our team.

    We are working on vehicle problems, and the folks who are actively working with us can attest to resolution of reported issues. In particular there are some bugs already logged regarding flight feather behavior at high altitudes.



  63. Should we mark bugs with the Physics component even if they’re not physics-related at all?

    There are two critical bugs that break content (my games in particular), SVC-1146 and SVC-1239. These are definitely related to Havok4 somehow — they only appear in Havok4-related regions. But they’re not physics bugs.

  64. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @64 Rifkin: Object linkage issues such as this, that behave differently on our earlier Havok1-based simulator and the new Havok4-based simulator are within the Havok4 project. I’ll import these and we’ll look a them. Thanks, Sidewinder

  65. Harvey says:

    @Sidewinder, flight is definitely messed up with scripted attachments, I’ll send in a bug report once I go through the scripts and find out which parts are causing the probs.

    @Kelly, thanks for the info, any chance I can send u $30 and have my sim ram increased to 1.5 gb 😉 (just joking, I know it’s not that simple)

  66. dusanwriter says:

    Just a note, as I’m not sure it’s a fix that’s needed with HAVOK4, but it seems like the linking distance might be different on H4. (?) Note to builders!

    This was a problem because I finished a housing build on H4, boxed it up with an Omega rezzer, and couldn’t figure out why it all came out in pieces on an H1 sim.

    If you’re doing builds on H4 you might want to consider conservative link distances…although it’s beautiful that you don’t get the “link failed pieces too far apart” error on H4 (or at least less often), you can’t then carry the linked item over to an H1 simulator.

    Either that, or I’m misinterpreting what happened.

  67. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @67 dusanwriter: The new linkability model has been mentioned repeatedly throughout the beta process, and is published on this wiki page Havok4 Linkability Rules. I hope that by now or soon most builders will look at this page.

    A significant change, as you’ll see on that page, is that linkability is now calculated using a spherical bounding space, so that the “oh I rezzed this the wrong way and the furthest edge pieces fell off” problem is made to go away. The converse, that it seems you have discovered, is that if you push the boundaries of linkability with the new simulator, you may find that pieces unlink when rezzed on the current standard simulator.



  68. dusanwriter says:

    Yes, I apologize Sidewinder. I am not a Havok4 beta tester and haven’t followed in detail. I was just a casual bystander who happened to build on a Havok4 sim.

    I didn’t read the Wiki because I didn’t know the sim I was on (not my own) was Havok4. Although when I switched OUT from the region (a friend’s sim generously being donated as a sandbox) I discovered I was on a different simulator because of the pop-up, the pop-up didn’t occur when I logged in, and I had no idea the sim owner had ordered up Havok4 and that I was now building on a different physics engine.

    In any case, I think the benefits of Havok4 are increasingly not just clear but very exciting improvements. Your responses on the blog are some of the best and most responsive I’ve ever seen, and massive kudos for that.

    You might want to consider when you get closer to a wider roll-out that if you do it on a rolling basis rather than grid wide at once that you consider some sort of log in pop-up that says “the sim you are on is running a different physics engine than when you left” (unless I totally missed that, for which I apologize). The pop-up when you change regions is a good indicator, but in my case it happened overnight.

    Also, my point wasn’t so much about issues with Havok4 afficionados and those who have read the Wiki, but a note to Havok4 sim owners to warn friends/associates who build on their land to do as recommended, realize it’s a beta sim, and read the Wiki.

  69. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @69 Dusanwriter: Thanks… Yes there is a popup but it’s inconsistent, and pretty bothersome right now. One of the other teams is working on a more consistent alert for these region crossings to be implemented “some time soon” (no, I don’t have a date :).

    That’s an interesting point, by the way, about people building things on a Havok4-based simulator who haven’t been involved with the process. I will add a link to the linkability rules in the next announcement post with our next refresh to remind people – thanks for flagging this one!



  70. Zi Ree says:

    I built a big sign in front of the Telehub on my island where it clearly says: “Havok IV beta test”. It gives out a notecard on touch 🙂

  71. Pingback: Havok 4 has a *long* way to go at Daikon Forge

  72. Sean Heying says:

    Will the build between 768 and 1024 be reinstated? I understand there are caveats there with rezzed items being deleted if the Havok4 region is restarted back to Havok1 but with all the high altitude testing I’m doing the ability to use my teleports to get up would save time.

  73. Hello,

    Finally I found a blog that shares my interests. Thanks and keep up the good work.

  74. Pingback: Dogear Nation » Blog Archive » Dogear-Nation - Episode 37 - State Patrol Rest Area

  75. Kelly Linden says:

    @73 Sean: The build limit is actually now 4096 in havok4. However there are viewer changes needed for the build tools to let you build that high. I don’t think we plan on building a havok4 viewer for the main Second Life (there really are very few changes) but we will probably update the viewer for the havok4 beta “soon”. I will try and remember to give instructions when we do on how to use that viewer to connect to the main Second Life as well.

  76. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @73 Sean: Just as an additional clarification, at some point in the roll-out process (perhaps not until the Havok4-based simulator update is deployed across Second Life, but this timing is not yet decided), the viewer changes that enable 4096 maximum altitude will be folded into the release viewer – the normal one used for general use. The workaround that Kelly mentions above would only be needed during the transition period, and then only if you want or need to utilize the new 4096 altitude limit. Regards, Sidewinder

  77. dusanwriter says:

    Sidewinder – once again, kudos for the responses, you’re handling this all wonderfully.

  78. Chryssalyn Donnelly says:

    Hey Sidewinder, awesome job with all this. I’d like to point out that SVC-1178 is not resolved. I have experienced prim float as high as .300 (particularly on the z axis) when copying selected prim. I don’t have to tell you how much extra time this adds on to building projects, manually fixing position numbers. Hoping this gets some top attention 🙂

  79. Nyalee Mirrikh says:

    Re: Havok4. I noticed I no longer can walk up steep ramps. Because this is useful especially for the ladders and whatnots that I create, I would like to know if there is any work around for it, because I would hate to have to find some elaborate scheme to make a teleporter system and all that for a -ladder-. My sim/store is on Havok4, and in normal sims it works fine.

  80. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @79 Chryssalyn: That is on the fix list, and we thought was had a solution for it, but that solution turned out to be incomplete. It is in the “to resolve” list. /Sidewinder

  81. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @80 Nyalee: Could you submit a jira for this, with a location so that we can test there? (region name and x/y/z coordinates, and remember to tag the jira component “physics” and affects version “havok4 beta”) Thanks. /Sidewinder

  82. Renouf Frobozz says:

    Sorry to say, but I am not happy. Standing here in Crash Me I have learned that llTargetOmega and llSetRot are inoperable. The broken item is not physical. Is there any chance this will be resolved? Customers are staring to complain.

  83. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @84 Renouf: There are open bugs being worked on in this area. Please file a jira marked component “physics” and affects version “havok4 beta”, marked critical with a very specific explanation of what is not working for your products with each of these functions, so that we can be sure that it is resolved. It may or may not be in the next refresh, but these are known and are in the fix list.

    Please remember that this is a beta program, and that only owner opt-in regions are involved. We will resolve issues as soon as possible, and identifying the last open issues is the goal of this process.


  84. WHAT HAPPENED TO MY MEGA-PRIMS??? This ‘upgrade’ has ruined many of my builds.

    They have been swapped out as the original creator was Gene Replacement and all shrunk down. They also have been removed from my inventory.

    There was NO NOTICE that this was happening and LL noted in an earlier blog comment that they wold NOT remove mega-prims.

  85. Sidewinder Linden says:

    @85 HatHeat: The megaprim position has actually been posted MANY times and discussed at many office hours. Megaprims over 256x256x256 will be chopped to that size, but anything size or smaller will be left alone.

    If you have an inventory loss, that is not likely related to Havok4.

    Which upgrade are you talking about, by the way, as we have not deployed a new Havok4 build since January 23rd?


    Sidewinder (Please feel free to contact me via IM inworld to follow up on this issue)

  86. Pingback: Samurai Edo is now testing Havok4 at Daikon Forge

  87. Pingback: Samurai Edo is now testing Havok4 « Samurai Pickle

  88. Pingback: Cold Steel - Havok4 Early Adopter « Samurai Pickle

  89. Pingback: Havok 4 has a *long* way to go « Samurai Pickle

  90. Pingback: Dogear-Nation - Episode 37 - State Patrol Rest Area » Dogear Nation

Comments are closed.