Wow.
Thanks, Dominick!
This is the kind of info I needed.

Dominick Accattato wrote:
> Mike:
>
> Good question, but SharedObject's are the way to go.  It seems you are 
> aware of efficient SharedObject design.  If your data is chatty, you 
> should design your slots to hold only the information necessary for 
> the functionality you desire.  In terms of x, y coordinates, you 
> should have a slot that holds only coordinate information.  An 
> inefficient SharedObject design would hold an entire User object which 
> has account information, coordinate information, etc..  With this 
> design, anytime you update the x or y coordinate, the entire User 
> Object would be sent to all clients.
>
> That said, your probably still wondering about whether SharedObject 
> sync is the most efficient way.  I believe the answer is yes.  Here is 
> my reason why:
> RTMP is a protocol which basically consists of a header and amf data, 
> therefore an "invoke" is represented by a hex number and so is a 
> "sync".  With that in mind, your only efficiency concerns are between 
> the Red5 framework and your application code. 
>
>     * So, a sharedObject is sent to the framework and the framework
>       handles sending it back to all the clients.
>     * An invoke would be sent to the framework, which would then be
>       sent to your application code, which would then be sent back to
>       the framework and then down to the client.
>
> Now, if you were talking about using the SharedObject.send method, you 
> may not need to bubble up to your application code, but your still 
> being sent to all the clients.  That being said, you should just use 
> the sharedObjects sync functionality anyway.
>
> Last, I would like to say that I think all these functions probably 
> behave almost identical in efficiency.  I don't think you will find 
> that much difference in performance.  The only thing that can really 
> be in-efficient is a poorly designed sharedObject.
>
> Hope this helps a little!
>
> On 8/27/07, *Mike* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>     Thanks for all of the great replies.
>     However...
>
>     My question is not really about the logic.
>     My question is about efficiency.
>
>     Is it actually more efficient to use Shared Objects in this case.
>     For example, I know Shared Objects can be inefficient if they are
>     larger because the entire object is sent when any property of the
>     object is updated.
>
>     Any input on this?
>     -Mike
>
>     Lenny Sorey wrote:
>>     I would have to agree with Storm on this issue of Shared Objects.
>>      
>>     I also would use Shared Objects.
>>      
>>     Lenny
>>
>>      
>>     On 8/27/07, *Storm* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
>>
>>         I'd use shared objects for that if you ask me.
>>
>>         Cheers
>>
>>         On 8/25/07, *Mike* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>         <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>>
>>             Is it more efficient to use SharedObjects for everything,
>>             or to use
>>             inokes on clients?
>>
>>             For example, let's say I have a game with 20 users connected.
>>             Each user is updating their character's position in the game.
>>
>>             Is SharedObject the way to go, or should I loop through
>>             every client and
>>             perform an invoke when updates are made?
>>
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Red5 mailing list
>>             [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>             http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>         -- 
>>         -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>         If a man speaks in a forest and his wife is not there, is he
>>         still wrong?
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Red5 mailing list
>>         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>         http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Red5 mailing list
>>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>     http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>>       
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Red5 mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Dominick Accattato, CTO
> Infrared5 Inc.
> www.newviewnetworks.com <http://www.newviewnetworks.com>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Red5 mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
>   



_______________________________________________
Red5 mailing list
[email protected]
http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org

Reply via email to