nu.kanga.list.mud-dev

26683: Re: [MUD-Dev] NWN gets more MUD-like (again)

From: "Smith, David (Lynchburg)" <smithdav@tycoelectronics.com>

>   Q: Is it really necessary to argue about half-seconds here in
>   "constant" overhead for each database hit?

>     A: Absolutely, if every persistence call in every script is
>     going to cause every thread to block, even for a few seconds,
>     the results versus latency and throughput could _easily_ cause
>     packets to back up, and eventually be lost if they can't be
>     serviced fast enough when the server is resumed from
>     suspension.

FWIW, the latency doesn't need to be nearly so great.  The MySQL on
RedHat server I use for my analysis apps was built out of spare
parts lying around after I upgraded my home system, and can respond
to queries in less than 1/100th of a second from a standing start as
long as the HD hasn't spun down from inactivity (the beast we just
got for the Herald back end is much, much faster).  This is largely
a scale and optimization problem, but it's unlikely that an NWN
server is going to hit anywhere near the loads I do.

It's a back-asswards way to give NWN persistance, and it certainly
wouldn't scale well, but it would work.

--Dave



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev@kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev