Possible bug with persistent_id and duplicated linked collections #60881

New Issue

Jonathan Dent · 2019-01-25T22:02:30+01:00

Jonathan Dent commented

2019-01-25 22:02:30 +01:00

Running new appleseed through various tests and I might have found a bug with the persistent_id of depsgraph.object_instances.

The attached scene file has a number of linked objects, including a collection that is duplicated (i.e. two empties reference the same linked collection).

When retrieving the object_instance.persistent_id it appears they are only counted for one collection and then repeated:

for inst in C.depsgraph.object_instances:
...         if inst.is_instance:
...         print(list(inst.persistent_id))
...         print(inst.instance_object.name_full)
...         
[0, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
Gem [Lib]
[1, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
dobj [Lib]
[2, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
Teapot [Lib]
[0, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
Gem [Lib]
[1, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
dobj [Lib]
[2, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
Teapot [Lib]

file linking.zip

Running new appleseed through various tests and I might have found a bug with the persistent_id of depsgraph.object_instances. The attached scene file has a number of linked objects, including a collection that is duplicated (i.e. two empties reference the same linked collection). When retrieving the object_instance.persistent_id it appears they are only counted for one collection and then repeated: ``` for inst in C.depsgraph.object_instances: ... if inst.is_instance: ... print(list(inst.persistent_id)) ... print(inst.instance_object.name_full) ... [0, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] Gem [Lib] [1, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] dobj [Lib] [2, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] Teapot [Lib] [0, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] Gem [Lib] [1, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] dobj [Lib] [2, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 2147483647, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0] Teapot [Lib] ``` [file linking.zip](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F6403442/file_linking.zip)

Jonathan Dent commented

2019-01-25 22:02:30 +01:00

Added subscriber: @jdent02

Brecht Van Lommel commented

2019-01-28 16:26:07 +01:00

Added subscriber: @brecht

Brecht Van Lommel commented

2019-01-28 16:26:07 +01:00

I believe it's the parent + persistent_id that gives you a unique key. But this is less obvious now that it's one flat list, so perhaps it should be included in there.

Jonathan Dent commented

2019-01-28 17:39:15 +01:00

That's how I ended up getting around it, and I wasn't sure if it was a bug or intended behavior (I could see the case being made for either)

Brecht Van Lommel commented

2019-02-01 19:57:37 +01:00

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'

Brecht Van Lommel closed this issue

2019-02-01 19:57:37 +01:00

Brecht Van Lommel self-assigned this 2019-02-01 19:57:37 +01:00

Brecht Van Lommel commented

2019-02-01 19:57:38 +01:00

Not considering it a bug then.

Sign in to join this conversation.

No Label

Download

What's New

Blender Studio

Manual

Developers Blog

Documentation

Benchmark

Blender Conference

Development Fund

One-time Donations

Possible bug with persistent_id and duplicated linked collections #60881