2024.1 Update causes new Schema errors

[GlynnisVP]

There's been a lot of chatter about the Schema error that was landing in a post about What's New in 2024.1 so I took the good suggestion from @RobDraw  to start a new thread here.

What is a Schema?

I welcome other people's input on this, but from my perspective, a schema can be best thought of as a blob of Revit metadata, held in Extensible Storage workset, that has a unique GUID. This blob of data is most often used by 3rd party developers but is also used by Autodesk (or companies acquired by Autodesk). The structure of that data, per each GUID, needs to be the same. If a developer alters the data structure, then a new GUID is needed to avoid the error.

What causes a Schema error?

In order to experience a Schema error, you need to have two files (or a file with a linked file) that have the same schema GUID but with a different data structure. Whichever file is opened first 'wins' within the active Revit session. This makes solving these problems REALLY hard because the file that displays the error is not necessarily the file with the 'problem' schema. It's also why this problem seems to be squashed sometimes and then resurface later. If you only ever open one Revit file at a time within a session of Revit, you'll never see the error.

What's the New Problem

The new problem seems to relate to Revit files that are upgraded to 2024/2024.1. The 11 July Revit 2024.1 release notes show that in there were changes made to the API to try and fix an outstanding schema condition. It feels like that change may have created some new conditions. We have an open case with Autodesk on this issue.

There are three new Autodesk solutions that suggest that to avoid the problem you need to upgrade your pre-2024 files one at a time to avoid a crashes, deleted data, or the error dialog prompt.

• https://help.autodesk.com/view/RVT/2024/ENU/?guid=GUID-38030A32-0460-4A2A-92D8-B698C0B01161
• https://help.autodesk.com/view/RVT/2024/ENU/?guid=GUID-40B0224D-9925-449B-84D0-8241EA15849A
• https://help.autodesk.com/view/RVT/2024/ENU/?guid=GUID-A8A5E4FD-8671-4B00-B3E6-CB4707D80744

I am hopeful that these are just interim workarounds to a problem that will be fixed. We have not changed our Ideate Software schemas and yet our customers are experiencing this issue.

[robertas_suminskas2]

If this a revit forum, why I should look to Insatllation and Licensing? I don't have an issue with other autodesk products like Fusion and AutoCAD, 3dx Max. 

I am getting confuse.

I will check forum.

[RSomppi]

You are having trouble with installing the update. There are some people that are very smart and willing to help with installation issues.

Good luck!

[HVAC-Novice]

So, did anyone actually install this SP without problems at all? 

I originally was afraid 2024.2 may introduce a new issue (hence my wanting to wait for the first patch). but now it looks like the bigger danger is to lose Revit entirely.... 

And yes, this Revit behavior that if an installation fails it leaves a complete mess  has been a big problem for many years. If it installs fine, it works like any other software and is flawless. But if there is one hiccup, it is a disaster to get rid of the botched installation (ask me how I know...). 

[ic349]

I installed it 1) with access and on another machine with the 2) deployment method. Both without a hitch.  Both already had Revit 2024 installed.  You can actually re-run it again if you had ones that failed.  Just run the whole package as install of deployment.  It is nice it took them until 2024 for the installation methods to function properly, mostly.  

[GaryOrrMBI]

I seem to have derailed the original thread but, since it's already off on a tangent...

@ic349 ,

In your case was the original Install of 2024 done via a deployment?

Is that deployment is still reachable by the update installer if so?

It failed on mine because it could not find the original installer. (an error we've seen and had to deal with time and time again).

-G

[ic349]

I test the deployment from Autodesk, then approve them and send to the build team and IT deployments and place them on our network.

You can find any instance of revit.msi as long as it is the same version. If you take and build a deployment on the local machine, but don't install it, then you would have the revit.msi.

https://www.autodesk.com/support/technical/article/caas/sfdcarticles/sfdcarticles/The-feature-you-ar...

For mine it is in C:\ADdeployments\2024\Revit\image\RVT_2024_en-US\x64\RVT\Revit.msi
And if I don't have it on a system...
"\\global.gsp\data\clients\na_clients\Autodesk\2024\Revit\image\RVT_2024_en-US\x64\RVT\RVT.msi"

For the network, I also have an INSTALL method that is only 15MB where something is missing or got messed up along the way. Anyone can quickly repair system. It will grab the INSTALL method to their local machine, and it will build the way as the deployment with all addins necessary. It will then go straight to Autodesk and download the relevant packages and place it in C:\Autodesk. For example:

C:\Autodesk\{D5178A1F-1641-4F96-B1E1-927621A04B39}\image\installer.exe -i deploy --offline_mode --ui_mode basic -o C:/Autodesk\{D5178A1F-1641-4F96-B1E1-927621A04B39}\image\Collection.xml --installer_version 1.41.0.249

So basically, it will create its own 'deployment' using the install method.

Hope this helps.

[Robertas_Suminskas]

Instalation Issue was resolved by Autodesk Support team. 

I think need improve software installer so people don't have issues to install or scare to install.

[HVAC-Novice]

Since it has been a week since release, I installed 2024.2. I downloaded the installation file to a local drive and ran it from there. No problem. All seems fine so far.

Obviously we won't know for sure if it actually resolves the schema issue. 

I like to come up with an upgrade strategy for R2025. Does Autodesk publish an approximate schedule for SP? I realize this will depend on problem occurring after release. But if I knew in April 2024 that there may be an SP1 in June, and SP2 in November, I could formulate a plan to wait till SP2. If I just say I wait till SP2, that may never show up if they only go to 2025.1.  

Looking back at R2024, just waiting for R2024.1 wouldn't have helped me at all. Maybe waiting for SP1 + patch to that would have helped. 

It is a balance between getting new features (and old bugs resolved) and getting a mature product without many new bugs. Maybe I just have to wait till 6 months after release of R2025 and screen this forum if there is an issue. 

[robertas_suminskas2]

Even if they publish roadmap when patches are going to be realises, it won't help, because that also can cause an issue :D.

Is not about updates it is about quality products that should be checked before realised. They should have computers where they have clean windows installation and where are computer which Revit was used for a long time and heavily. This how is possible to pick up a lot of bugs and analyse the behaviour of the software. 

Programming blindy doesn't bring good results and performance. Waiting for user to report also is not a best practice.

I hope the code they did is proper documented, optimised and it was revised. Best developer is who uses the software he created or contributed.

I would be so happy to help, I know for sure they a not intrested.

[robertas_suminskas2]

About 2024.2. I have three PCs. Always use one at a time. One PC is at home, which I use most at home. Another PC is on Cloud, which I use for emergencies (Home PC or Office PC fails; for example, I couldn't use Revit 2024 on my home PC), and the third PC is in the office, where most days I spend in the office.

Home PC
I had an issue at home with my PC updating Revit 2024.2. When I uninstalled Revit and downloaded the standard installer, it didn't work. When I downloaded a custom installer, I still had the same problem. Only it was resolved with a support team. Big applause to them for their courage to help and professional support. But it took 2 hours to solve.

Cloud PC.
It was updated without issues.

Office PC.
It gives errors during updates. I can't waste hours during work to try to Update or solve the Revit issue. I will try again one Friday after work.

[robertas_suminskas2]

It didn't work for me. I tried this as well. This first thing came to my mind then I saw an error.

As the programmer - Golden rule is always read error messages 🙂

[RSomppi]

AFAIK, this issue only affects upgraded projects. New projects are not affected. It’s something that could have been prevented or at least made less impactful on the user side. Experience and best practices have taught me to upgrade projects only when necessary. Upgrading just because there’s a new version with some new features can be risky. Testing the new version should not be done on a live project. Most of us know Autodesk”s history with new versions and have developed a habit of waiting and watching for any potential issues that others suss out. (Thanks to all of you.)While I agree this issue should have been caught, your ranting is misguided and misdirected. Let’s hope there will be fix for those who upgraded projects without a backup plan.

[b_fetzer7XL7R]

Hi @Anonymous!

For me also 2024.2 causes new Schema errors 😞

It is sometimes not possible for us to open multiple Revit projects in one Revit session. It is also sometimes not possible to link projects (campus)
All of the problem projects were originally created in Revit 2023 and migrated to Revit 2024 For me it is not understandable where the errors lie.
I contacted support days ago but still haven't received a solution.
Is there a solution?
Can the files be repaired?
Greetings, Bernhard

[b_fetzer7XL7R]

more errors

[b_fetzer7XL7R]

more errors

[robertas_suminskas2]

The problem is the Families and External projects files which I used as a room for each file in a new project. 

[randy_lmn]

Unlike many other build issues, this one could easily be missed in the typical vetting process from BIM managers and 3rd party add-in developers.  Ideate, for example is a widely used, well known and reputable add-in in the industry and they were taken by surprise too. 

When our office discovered the issue, we had been testing internally for months and did not see any issues arise.  After upgrading our first model, which was strategically done with consideration to where a project was in milestones and comparing the project timeline against Revit version phase-outs, the issue popped up well after the time of the update.  This issue was only visible in a live model, so I think it is imperative to test in live models with live links, otherwise testing in a vacuum won't produce the errors.  In addition, most models are cloud based and an all or nothing update.  In order to test against current project set up, Autodesk should really be offering a utility to copy Cloud hubs so we can test real world scenarios of links interacting with each other.  Because Autodesk is now exclusively a subscription-based environment and stops support on builds after 3 years and then stops licensing products after 5, I would say it absolutely is important that the upgrade process stays on pace with releases of new software.  There are too many collaborators in the industry that all have these same time constraints, so it is unreasonable to say we should only upgrade at the last minute.  I've seen too many project teams run out that clock due to this fear (which 2024 really degraded this trust and makes this fear substantiated) and as a result try to make too great of a leap in a window of time that is too small to methodically get this done.  This can also cause major delays and problems when projects are not proactively staying within that two year update window based off project start times and schedules.  Therefore, issues like this where two financial quarters on a project have passed before these irreversible issues started occur (or started becoming visible) is unacceptable in my opinion.  These were "sleeper cell" errors that occur and can continue to occur well after the act of updating.  I think we can absolutely hold Autodesk accountable on this particular bug.  This is not a bug that can be tweaked and easily fixed.  Revit 2024 can devastate project files, project timelines, and project budgets with the only solution being to abandon months worth of work or operate with considerable risk.

I think it is also very unfair to say that updates like this shouldn't be done without a "backup plan".  We collectively have put our trust in the reliability of this software and this company.  We all pay for these updates and many of these updates are to stay on pace with cloud-based security and product stability.  

We internally have continued to test with the latest version of Revit and any family or file that went through those initial builds of 2024 are irreversibly corrupt without extreme autodesk intervention which is unsustainable.  And even with that Autodesk intervention, all it takes is one family to have that schema error and other files opened within the same Revit session will then become corrupt as well as schemas transfer through the sessions journal file.  There doesn't even have to be interaction between the two files.  We even recently did an update from 2022 into the newest build of 2024 and still found a schema error.  Fortunately we only had one project this impacted and our window of time lost was under a month.  We were frustrated and burdened, and had to rely on our back up plan, but I could imagine a scenario where if the circumstances were slightly different, it could have been devastating and months of work lost.  Our office will likely skip 2024 all together at this point, but we are also in a window where Autodesk will be phasing out 2021 next April.  Which means we will only be running 2 out of our 4 software versions that we pay for.  So either, Autodesk needs to be way better at communication and roll out, they need to test in more real-world scenarios using common place add-ins, they need to do away with version phase outs, or they need to reduce their prices as a result of compromised software since the promise of what we are paying for is not being fully fulfilled.

[RSomppi]

---

@randy_lmn wrote:

I think it is also very unfair to say that updates like this shouldn't be done without a "backup plan" 

---

---

@randy_lmn wrote:

rely on our back up plan,

---

You have a backup plan but you think it's unfair?

Without a backup plan, what would have happened?

Having a bakup plan is essential. How can that be unfair?

My training taught me to never upgrade unless it is necessary. We have not had any projects on 2023 or 2024. I've still got projects on 2019. I'm not really sure what you are getting on about.

[HVAC-Novice]

Your statement only makes sense if Autodesk would refund us the subscription if a new version is botched. As it stands, most of us pay annual subscription and rightfully expect it to work as intended. No excuses. A new software should be thoroughly tested before release, and any bugs that appear after release, should be fixed asap. An annual release software should NOT take 7 months to maybe work at this point. 

Your 2019 version may have bugs that were fixed in 2020 and so on. So your strategy also isn't fool proof. Especially if you interact with other software or OS that is newer, you may have problems that won't be fixed for R2019. 

Just using an old version would a) not make us take advantage of new features and bug fixes we pay for. And b) it would prevent us from using more modern OS and hardware etc. that only are supported by newer versions of Revit. 

Backups only help to go back to a previous point in time. If you switch to R2024 and keep working and then realize the schema error, you have to go all the way back to a backup that didn't have the error (you only know there is n error, if you reload a project). and if you already put in work in R2024, you can't just revert back to R2023. You then have to re-do the work in R2023 if you then decide to not use R2024. 

I find it hard to believe someone here takes Autodesk's side.... they clearly are at fault here. 

[randy_lmn]

Don't get me wrong on back-ups.  Absolutely, it is important we all have them and we certainly archive everything for our worst-case emergencies.  But just because we have them doesn't excuse Autodesk for their complacency in this issue.  And in this circumstance, even with a backup plan, as a result of how this build has unfolded, that backup may be from months ago.  I've personally never seen such a devastating build where the consequences have been as steep as they are for most of the people who have gone through this build.  This isn't one where the issues are immediately apparent, and you can roll back a day or a week.

2019 as it is no longer a supported version of the software and next year will be phased out.  For most of us it requires an additional headache of hurdles that most consultant teams and industry leaders I trust would advise against to continue using it after it is phased out.  That decision to move forward or to hang back involves a lot more than a single office decision.  Maybe I'm alone here, but it seems to me best practice to stay on a two year update schedule based off project timelines and the rolling clock of Autodesk products.  Again, Autodesk made a decision to transition to a subscription based model and phase out versions.  My expectation is continued reliability from Autodesk on any release they make public as a result of this subscription based model.  I know that is not the case and we are always cautious and skeptical.

What I am going on about is making sure Autodesk provides the services we pay for, and in this case, their product offering has been cut for this year and as such prices should reflect that.