Difference in the handling of violations between xS1 and xS2

[innomedio]

Hello,

In xServer 1, the default cost for violated segments was 50000, but it could be changed. (https://svc-eu-n.cloud.ptvgroup.com/man ... Violations)
In xServer 2, the cost is no longer adjustable, but is now fixed at 150000. (https://xserver2.cloud.ptvgroup.com/das ... ns.enabled)
Is this the same behavior as if we had set the cost of violations to 150000 in xServer 1, or are there some other differences in the way violations are handled between the two API?

Best regards,
Benjámin

[Bernd Welter]

Well, the handling of violations has been reviewd and changed between xRoute1 and xRoute 2 on a significant level - therefore it makes sense to check this with you. The statement below is one of the major changes:

• In xRoute1 the costs of violations are applied per violated segment
• In xRoute2 the costs are for each “uninterrupted sequence of violated segments” (ok, it's more complex, but for the moment let's just focus on these differences).

As an example let’s look at the following structures of segments: 0 = not violated, 1 = violated (xroute 1 with 50’000 costs , xroute2 = 150’000):

• 01010 🡪 xRoute1 : 100’000, xRoute2: 300’000
• 01100 🡪 xRoute1 : 100’000, xRoute2: 150’000
• 01110 🡪 xRoute1 : 150’000, xRoute2: 150’000
• 0111110 🡪 xRoute1: 250’000, xRoute2: 150’000

Does this help you to decide how to use the violations in xRoute2?