Greetings,
On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 05:06:52PM -0400, Treker wrote:
> I don't think it's a good idea to have stock circle use such systems to
> reduce memory usage.
>
> This should be a patch or snippet...which it is--and should remain so. I
> think what stock Circle should include are faster, better, speedier
> things--not memory-conserving things...of course, in this case you can have
> the best of both worlds...
Speedier algorithms? On a Pentim MMX 233 mhz (586, not 686) a default
Circle MUD remains way under 1 % of CPU usage. From my experiences,
Memory is more of a concern, because of the huge database a MUD
might accesses (Worlds of 20k+ rooms filled with npcs, AI behaviour,
and whatnot). Because great memory consumption leads to swapping, it
slows the system down as a whole.
That's why IMHO memory saving techniques are more appropraiate than
speeding up things as a whole. Here I say: KISS, because in a codebase
like Circle, readability and maintainability and portability is more
important than performance; Circle after all is a classical beginner's MUD.
There is only one CPU intensive thing in circle, which is the BFS
seach, which can be furtherly constrained (e.g. reject out-of-zone
tracks) to avoid 50 or so players tracking at the same time to
get your system down ;) (or resource limit or whatever).
>
> I'll submit some code/more specific ideas when all this schoolwork is done.
> -Treker
>
No one hinders you to do that ;)
--
Christian Loth
Coder of 'Project Gidayu'
Computer Science Student, University of Dortmund
chris@gidayu.mud.de - http://gidayu.mud.de
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 04/10/01 PDT