Code center > Suggestions
Bringing back public organism sharing
bacillus:
--- Quote from: Numsgil ---If someone downloads it it'll die fairly quickly.
--- End quote ---
Fairly quickly is an understatement. Even the stronger bots have a small chance of surviving, as one bot will have a hard time colonizing a simulation that is already teeming with others. At best, you'll just be exporting packages of energy.
Botsareus:
--- Quote ---If someone downloads it it'll die fairly quickly.
--- End quote ---
Good Point, I never seen it that way...
So the uselss but is downloaded , it dies , then a better bot is uploaded , brilliant.
--- Quote ---I view our current FTP plumbing for IM as temporary, not so much for security reasons as for scalability reasons. The client-server, file-based semantics I'm using will not scale very high, probably not much above 50 or 100 users, do to collisions on pop files and the top bot files in the download queue. If IM ever gets really popular, we will have to go with parallel mega-sims or change to either a peer-peer mechanism with a rendevuez server or some sort of distributed multi-server store and forward system. In fact, one crazy idea I may explore is using an email server as our transport. Given our needs are largely asyncronous, this could work well...
--- End quote ---
Sorry, but I still did not understand to how much robots the ftp is limited to?...
50 or 100 users * 9 = 450 or 900 robots?
Numsgil:
Size isn't a limitation. We have gigabytes to burn. The limit is the number of users logged in at once. Our FTP setup limits us to 50 FTP users at once. If we ever had that many users going at once, it would be a Bad Thing.
EricL:
Even without the user limit, we would limit out on the number I/O operations per second the server can handle. FTP is really a poor way to do client-server and our semantics translate to 10's of head seeks per conencted sim per sync interval and this increases lineraly (for each sim) with the number of connected sims. So, depending on the I/O sub system, the way I currently do it, even without the session limit, the server will go I/O bound at some low number of users, probably fewer than 100.
Botsareus:
I understand, thank you.
However at some point in time size will become a problem...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version