Crossfire Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Misc notes/thoughts.
- To: "Kristofer M. Bosland" <>
- Subject: Re: Misc notes/thoughts.
- From: GESTIONNAIRE DU Casino <>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 16:57:41 -0500 (EST)
- cc: "Michael B. Martin" <>, Tadah <>, crossfire (at) ifi.uio.no
- In-Reply-To: <>
On Mon, 11 Dec 1995, Kristofer M. Bosland wrote:
> I was thinking of just keeping the objects relating to the player,
> and the objects on the map the player was in. This would then be flushed
> everytime the player change maps. I don't expect much more than an order
> of 1k objects per map, which means with text names you should be below
> ~50k for this. Without this mechanism, the Client/Server traffic would be
> dominated by "refreshes" of data containing objects that have not
> changed/moved (Client: "Is that Grass still there?"; Server: "Yeah";
> Client "I'll draw it again, then..."). I think a differential approach
> would be much lower bandwidth.
So when you leave a map, you flush all the data for it, and load all the
new one... Why not do a bit a caching ?
Usually maps won't change a lot.... So the client could keep the maps in
memory for a certain amount of time, say 10 minutes, and when the player
enters a map, the client either asks for the whole map, if it doesn't
have it in memory, or aks for a diff since time x.
But then, the server needs to remember :-)
What is the important factor ? optimising the client/server
communication, or the memory requirement of both client and server ?
---
Casino