Yes, it's clear that it is often convenient to complement GAE with a server that's handling long-running processes, managing queues of work, efficiently distributing messages, etc. And your transactional concerns seem valid, although it also seems like it should be possible to create a new entity group/model type to represents the type of contentious relationship that has you worried. But I'm sure there are lots of issues I haven't considered!
Thanks for the info. Ben On Nov 16, 12:10 pm, Josh Heitzman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The lack of any long running server side process also precludes doing > any real time MMOGs. With many turn based web based MMOGs there is no > way to partition the game state into entities such that executing all > player commands only requires updating entities in one entity group > during the execution of the command, so its necessary to implement a > cross-entity group transaction layer on top of the GAE datastore, but > its currently unclear to me that this can actually be done while > staying under GAEs quotas. > > On Nov 16, 11:52 am, Ben Nevile <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > HiRoss, > > > > Well, Google App Engine would be a terrible place to serve most > > > massively multiplayer games. I hope that's not what got you > > > interested in GAE. > > > Pretend I'm dumb... no, it's okay, I *am* dumb when it comes to MMOG. > > Why would GAE be a terrible place to serve these? The type of > > communication required? > > > Ben --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
