>Suppose I only want to send position data to players that are within a certain range. For example, anyone within 100 "meters".
Your mileage will vary. If you have 1000 connected users and in each 100m radius there are only 10 users then nc.call can be a good decision! but in such a case you can also have a SO for each 100mx100m sqare radius,etc... .Depends on what you are trying to do! On 28/08/07, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Good point, Octavian. > Suppose I only want to send position data to players that are within a > certain range. > > For example, anyone within 100 "meters". > > SharedObjects don't really give me that luxury, do they? > I may be forced to use nc.call? > Or, is there another method? > > Is there a version of nc.call that does NOT require a return message? > > Naicu Octavian wrote: > > >I agree with everything said here, but i must add something to defend > > poor nc.call's :) > > > > Another thing is that with nc.call calls for the server to the clients > > you can target specific clients. A ns.send sends the info to all > > clients subscribed to that SO. This is a more general issue but good > > to have in mind when one is developing a private messages feature for > > example! :) > > > > -- > > Naicu Octavian, > > Project Manager for AVChat > > http://www.avchat.net > > > > On 28/08/07, *Storm* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > I agree with everything said here, but i must add something to > > defend poor nc.call's :) > > > > SOs may have a bad behaviour in some extreme cases such as > > updating right before disconnecting and such. I've had to change > > some functionality from SOs to nc.calls due to this, those "few > > bytes" of the callbacks are pretty useful to ensure that the > > update has been really recieved. Therefor everything has its > > place, even in a one-to-all update scenario. > > > > Cheers > > > > > > On 8/28/07, *Joachim Bauch* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > Dominick Accattato schrieb: > > [...] > > > 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. > > > > using so.send or SO syncs even saves you a few bytes bandwidth > > as for > > nc.call, the client sends back the result of the method call > > to the > > server (or the server back to the client) which isn't done for > > SO events. > > Well, just a few bytes ;) but if you have lots of calls... > > > > Joachim > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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] > > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
