On 2009-12-18, at 10:13 AM, Kelly Linden wrote: > I'll be honest. I just really don't like the dynamic resource limits idea. > It is very neat and interesting in theory, and fun to design and discuss. > However I see a lot of value in knowing all my content will continue to work > and knowing what content I can use - In knowing that when I buy/rent/lease > land as part of that I am buying/renting/leasing a specific amount of > resources. I hate the idea of *any* of my content only sometimes working.
[ cut ] > That said, I also understand the usage issues here, which mirror closely the > more generic web hosting problems. Resource usage patterns aren't equal or > consistent over time or space, this is obvious and known and is NOT something > we are ignoring. The general solution for web hosting is to over-sell, rely > on some rules of averages and be able to move things around to accommodate > users. Doing something similar is certainly a possibility, and one I have > pushed for. It isn't as trivial as just setting higher numbers - we need to > adjust and fix our infrastructure to more optimally assign regions to hosts - > but it is certainly not impossible, and indeed such infrastructure changes > would benefit everyone regardless. > > Dynamic resource limits are just complicated by nature. They are fluid in > some respect, and they change based on time and usage - that is just what it > means. Unfortunately it is that nature that makes it hard to plan around and > hard to build content for and hard to understand. The system we use needs to > be as easy as prim limits are now, where you can see the cost of an object > and you can see how much you can support. > > - Kelly I tend to agree. I will also point out that aside from the complicated nature ( and unpredictable behaviour ) that dynamic limits generally imply, there is also the trend toward circumvention that has to be considered. In any system where the opportunity exists, people will find ways to "game" the system. Consider temp prims and the devices that people have devised in order to increase the effective number of prims they can use. I also agree with Kelly's desire for predictable behaviour. Creating a situation in which content may suddenly stop working because of what other content is doing is an invitation to disaster. Non-technical users will not understand ( and shouldn't have to understand ) the way in which things work. My experience is that predictable lower limits are a *much* easier sell then unpredictable higher ones, because they make sense to the masses. If LL wants to explore dynamic resource allocation, then it may be that that could be explored on a smaller scale after script limits are in place on the grid as a whole. It's worth keeping in mind that we already have a system of "(sort of) graceful failure" in that script memory overcommitment leads to paging activity that degrades the sim performance as a whole. This is (mostly) annoying. I can't imagine a situation in which running content stops working arbitrarily (in the eyes of the average user) as being perceived as anything other than a badly broken grid. _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
