Conflicting cache info in two GPX files on Oregon

[+korey99]

Has anyone figured out what happens on an Oregon (550 specifically) if a cache is listed in two different loaded GPX files?

 

I created two GPX files, each with only one cache (the same one). I modified the description so that I could tell which version "won", but I haven't been able to pin down the rules. It doesn't seem to be related to filename or file modified date, nor the date of the cache listed in the GPX file.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Korey

[+baloo&bd]

Has anyone figured out what happens on an Oregon (550 specifically) if a cache is listed in two different loaded GPX files?

 

I created two GPX files, each with only one cache (the same one). I modified the description so that I could tell which version "won", but I haven't been able to pin down the rules. It doesn't seem to be related to filename or file modified date, nor the date of the cache listed in the GPX file.

 

Anyone have any thoughts?

 

Korey

 

I know this isn't really answering the question, however why would it matter? Most clear out the old GPX to load the new to make sure the info is current.

[+dfx]

Have you considered the order in which the files were copied into the directory? If the unit reads the directory listing in the simplest possible way for FAT file systems, then that would be the order in which it loads the files...

[+korey99]

Well, the main use case is as follows:

 

I build the database of caches I want to load in GSAK, then send those caches to my Oregon (which creates geocaches.gpx).

 

A few days later, the guys at work want to go after a couple of new caches over lunch. My data from GSAK is stale, but I can grab my latest pocket query from the website, and copy it onto my Oregon.

 

Now I've likely got duplicates in between those files. Probably not usually a big deal, but I intend to correct the coordinates for solved puzzles in GSAK, so those conflicts would be problematic. I also just like knowing how it works.

[+korey99]

Oddly enough, I had two files at first, one named 345635_something.gpx and the other was geocaches.gpx. The first time I viewed the cache on my Oregon, it came from the former file. Then, I renamed geocaches.gpx to 11111_something.gpx, and when I viewed it on my Oregon, it referenced the 11111 file. Then, I named the 11111 file to 99999 (trying to determine whether filename sorting mattered), as well as several other renames of both files, but the description never changed any longer for any trials.

 

So, if it's from the FAT order, I wouldn't have expected that... Any pattern I noticed seemed to be nothing more than superstition.

 

Have you considered the order in which the files were copied into the directory? If the unit reads the directory listing in the simplest possible way for FAT file systems, then that would be the order in which it loads the files...

[+dfx]

Oddly enough, I had two files at first, one named 345635_something.gpx and the other was geocaches.gpx. The first time I viewed the cache on my Oregon, it came from the former file. Then, I renamed geocaches.gpx to 11111_something.gpx, and when I viewed it on my Oregon, it referenced the 11111 file. Then, I named the 11111 file to 99999 (trying to determine whether filename sorting mattered), as well as several other renames of both files, but the description never changed any longer for any trials.

 

So, if it's from the FAT order, I wouldn't have expected that... Any pattern I noticed seemed to be nothing more than superstition.

 

Ah, I was actually only thinking of cases where it loads multiple files at the same time. What you describe here can be explained: when you rename a file, from the Oregon's perspective it means that one file was deleted (the old file name) and a new file was added (the new file name). Which means that it will wipe out everything that was contained in the old file, and then proceeds to load in the caches from the new file, overwriting caches that it had already loaded. The file that you didn't rename isn't touched, it's not loading caches from there again, so anything contained in the file that you did rename overwrites the other.

[+korey99]

Ok, good point. Presumably the unit won't re-read an untouched file so my previous tests were omitting a factor.

 

I did about a dozen tests, and didn't come up with much conclusive. One thing I did figure out though, is that if you remove (or rename) all GPX files, boot the GPS (so the caches all clear out), plug back in and put the files you want on there, it will behave predictably. The file with the lowest filename seems to be used for any conflicts.