How about this,  use nc.call to notify users when another user had 
entered/exited it's range and have the client register/deregister SOs.  
I'm not sure that will save much, setting up a SO might be an expensive 
call.  Or perhaps the shared object for each user has a list of users in 
range that the server just updates.... or would that entire list be sent 
each time a single item in it is updated?

Naicu Octavian wrote:
> >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] 
> <mailto:[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 <http://www.avchat.net>
>     >
>     > On 28/08/07, *Storm* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>     > <mailto:[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]>
>     >     <mailto: [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]> <mailto:
>     [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]>
>     <mailto:[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
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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