EVE Search - let us distinguish between BPC and BPO finally!!!

All Channels

Science and Industry

let us distinguish between BPC and BPO finally!!!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 17:12:00 - [1] I'm getting mad every time I have to sort the fuggin BPO out of a bunch of BPC in hangars and POS divisions!!!! I dont care about technical backgrounds and explanations why things are broken currently, if you did it wrong, then simply fix it!
Jokiller Gerius Gallente	Posted - 2010.03.17 17:53:00 - [2] Edited by: Jokiller Gerius on 17/03/2010 17:54:02 not broken see below for why it can't be done as posted by ccp lingorm The database is heavily 'normalised' (a method of removing duplicate data) this means that the marker for BPO/BPC is not actually in the Inventory table, it is a table that stores specific differential data. This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. Trust me if we could do it I would love it ... but from a DB point of view the extra load is not wanted for the amount of gain. A good workaround is to actually use the S&I interface and then use the Blueprints and Corp blueprints tabs on there, they have a different query that does include this information as the query is filtered to blueprints only. It will also show the ME and PE values in the columns on these views.
Evilbeero	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:16:00 - [3] Edited by: Evilbeero on 17/03/2010 18:23:16 I use 2 containers, and throw in a bookmark called BPO in one, and BPC in the 2nd, always clear for me which blueprints i am looking at. I know it doesnt solve the problem, which won't be solved most likely as the poster above me states, but its a great work around.
Joe SMASH You Got A Purty Mouth	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:23:00 - [4] Originally by: Evilbeero I use 2 containers, and throw in a bookmark called BPO in one, and BPC in the 2nd, always clear for me which blueprints i am looking at. Exactly what I do. And the corp hanger has separate tabs for BPOs and BPCs. As long as you put the right print in the right place, there is no problems. When the server is less laggy and there is more overhead in the db, then we can talk about making them look different. ----------------------------------- Originally by: Kali Zero Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:43:00 - [5] Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 18:44:51 Originally by: Jokiller Gerius The database is heavily 'normalised' (a method of removing duplicate data) this means that the marker for BPO/BPC is not actually in the Inventory table, it is a table that stores specific differential data. This means that to add this field to the inventory return we would need to do an addition join to the differential data table to look up this field for EVERY item in the inventory regardless of whether or not this is a blueprint of not. stop quoting bullsht. btw Originally by:* Robert Caldera I dont care about technical backgrounds and explanations why things are broken currently, if you did it wrong, then simply fix it! Originally by: Jokiller Gerius Trust me if we could do it I would love it ... but from a DB point of view the extra load is not wanted for the amount of gain. bull**! Stop quoting bull*! A simple flag cant be that hard to realize, the information is behind the BPC anyways if you look into item info. STOP QUOTING BULLSHT A CLUELESS DEV SAID ONCE OVER AND OVER AGAIN!! Originally by: Jokiller Gerius A good workaround ... I dont want pesky workarounds, I want a FIX!
Joe SMASH You Got A Purty Mouth	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:46:00 - [6] Originally by: Robert Caldera bull**! Stop quoting bull*! A simple flag cant be that hard to realize, the information is behind the BPC anyways if you look into item info. STOP QUOTING BULLSHT A CLUELESS DEV SAID ONCE!! Originally by: Jokiller Gerius A good workaround ... I dont want pesky workarounds, I want a FIX! Oooo... You must be one of those, 'If you do not agree with me, you are wrong' type of people.... ----------------------------------- Originally by: Kali Zero Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:48:00 - [7] Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 18:48:39 Originally by: Joe SMASH Oooo... You must be one of those, 'If you do not agree with me, you are wrong' type of people.... no I just dont want fukking workarounds pain in the ass anymore and please stop repeating bull**** like a parrot, it doesnt get more true from that.
SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:50:00 - [8] Originally by: Robert Caldera I dont care about technical backgrounds and explanations why things are broken currently, if you did it wrong, then simply fix it! They didn't do it wrong, so there's nothing to fix. It's designed that way on purpose. Read up on the subject of database normalization. They COULD differentiate between the two. What they are saying is that it's not worth the performance hit of adding an additional join (which is a logical connection between two tables in a database) to the query that is called when you view an inventory. This would likely affect EVERY instance in which that query is called, too - not just the ones involving blueprints. The answer to your question is not, "We can't," but rather, "We can, we're just not going to." --------------- Faction-Militia:Player-Alliance::Newbie-corp:Player-corp
Joe SMASH You Got A Purty Mouth	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:53:00 - [9] Well, since you cannot be bothered to look it up apparently, here is the previously quoted thread: LINK. It has been discussed, at great length. It will not be changed anytime soon. Can I have your stuff? ----------------------------------- Originally by: Kali Zero Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:55:00 - [10] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey They didn't do it wrong, so there's nothing to fix. It's designed that way on purpose. Read up on the subject of database normalization. stfu I graduated in computer science and databases are my daily business, so please stfu teaching me stuff I'm messing aroung for years! Originally by: SurrenderMonkey They COULD differentiate between the two. What they are saying is that it's not worth the performance hit of adding an additional join (which is a logical connection between two tables in a database) not worth? NOT WORTH?? WE LIKE FUKKING OUR CUSTOMERS MUCH MUCH MORE, is it what you're going to tell me?? How many threads were there in the past regarding this painly issue??? Every producer/inventer is arguing about this WRONG IMPROPER implementation! If you cant joing a simple fukkin BOOLEAN FLAG into your join, either fire your database designer or JUST DENORMALIZE THE FUKKIN BOOLEAN into the parent table!!
SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2010.03.17 18:59:00 - [11] Originally by: Robert Caldera Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 18:57:04 Originally by: SurrenderMonkey They didn't do it wrong, so there's nothing to fix. It's designed that way on purpose. Read up on the subject of database normalization. stfu I graduated in computer science and databases are my daily business, so please stfu teaching me stuff I'm messing aroung for years! Originally by: SurrenderMonkey They COULD differentiate between the two. What they are saying is that it's not worth the performance hit of adding an additional join (which is a logical connection between two tables in a database) not worth? NOT WORTH?? WE LIKE FUKKING OUR CUSTOMERS MUCH MUCH MORE, is it what you're going to tell me?? How many threads were there in the past regarding this painly issue??? Every producer/inventer is arguing about this WRONG IMPROPER implementation! If you cant joing a simple fukkin BOOLEAN FLAG into your join, either fire your database designer or JUST DENORMALIZE THE FUKKIN BOOLEAN into the parent table, whatever, rendering the life of the half eve population much easier!! Yes. Not worth. Glad I could clear this up for you. --------------- Faction-Militia:Player-Alliance::Newbie-corp:Player-corp
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:06:00 - [12] Originally by: Robert Caldera Technical excuses for MAJOR GAMEPLAY flaws are always a really really dumb idea! Gameplay defines the backend usually! IT'S NOT REALLY A MAJOR GAME PLAY FLAW, BUT I ADMIRE YOUR ABILITY TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE LITTLE ****. Typed in caps so you could hear me.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:11:00 - [13] Originally by: Tellenta Originally by: Robert Caldera Technical excuses for MAJOR GAMEPLAY flaws are always a really really dumb idea! Gameplay defines the backend usually! IT'S NOT REALLY A MAJOR GAME PLAY FLAW, BUT I ADMIRE YOUR ABILITY TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE LITTLE ****. Typed in caps so you could hear me. it IS! FIX IT
Sir Waka	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:12:00 - [14] grrrr bull******* ****** BPO/BPC distinction **** grrr ra ra ** not worth*** NOT WORTH!!!! *** bull&**** Sorry, I wasn't sure how else to respond to a post when all I see is this. Seriously, grow up. If you want it fixed that bad, apply for a job at CCP. They have said it will not happen. I THINK that means they aren't going to make the change. Do the work around, stop being ignorant, you are NOT the only person that is ever right, and please, stop crying.
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:24:00 - [15] Originally by: Robert Caldera Originally by: Tellenta Originally by: Robert Caldera Technical excuses for MAJOR GAMEPLAY flaws are always a really really dumb idea! Gameplay defines the backend usually! IT'S NOT REALLY A MAJOR GAME PLAY FLAW, BUT I ADMIRE YOUR ABILITY TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE LITTLE ****. Typed in caps so you could hear me. it IS! FIX IT I JUST REALIZED I CAN ADD A TIDBIT OF HELPFUL INFORMATION!!!!!! WHEN YOU SORT BY TYPE WHEN YOU MESS UP AND PUT YOUR BPO IN WITH THE BPC'S THE BPO WILL BE EITHER THE FIRST OR LAST ONE DEPENDING ON WHAT BPO IT IS, NO I DON'T KNOW WHY ONE BPO ENDS UP FIRST ON THE LIST AND ANOTHER ENDS UP BEING LAST!!!!!!! I KNOW YOU WERE NOT INTERESTED IN WORKAROUNDS, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE SAME INTERESTS AS YOU!!!! typed in caps to show I was serious.
Sir Waka	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:26:00 - [16] Originally by: Tellenta typed in caps to show I was serious. THIS ISN'T IN CAPS. YOU MAY WANT TO EDIT SO THAT WE KNOW YOU ARE BEING SERIOUS ABOUT BEING SERIOUS!
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:43:00 - [17] I only deal in bpos, yay!
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:46:00 - [18] Originally by: Tellenta I KNOW YOU WERE NOT INTERESTED IN WORKAROUNDS, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE SAME INTERESTS AS YOU!!!! then stop trolling if you're not interested in a fix and stfu.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:51:00 - [19] Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 19:52:42 Originally by: Tellenta IT'S NOT REALLY A MAJOR GAME PLAY FLAW being unable to distinguish 2 main groups of blueprint items easily and having a lot of annoying work sorting the sht out, once mixed accidentally, is a major flaw for me. Originally by:* Tellenta Typed in caps so you could hear me. FU
Emporer Norton	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:58:00 - [20] Is easy use divison for bpo another for bpc or 2 containers or if in hanger s&i to sort thru quickly
Joe SMASH You Got A Purty Mouth	Posted - 2010.03.17 19:59:00 - [21] I am feeling nice, so I will help ya out. If you send me all your BPOs and BPCs, I will sort them into containers for you and contract them back. I will be online tonight. ----------------------------------- Originally by: Kali Zero Warp core stabilizers are like condoms. Nice and safe, but they make it a little less fun for everyone involved.
FunzzeR Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.03.17 20:05:00 - [22] Originally by: Robert Caldera Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 17:22:40 I'm getting mad every time I have to sort the fuggin BPO out of a bunch of BPC in hangars and POS divisions!!!! I dont care about technical backgrounds and explanations why things are broken currently, if you did it wrong, then simply fix it! Just use only bpos like I do But I digress, I have been hearing about this quibble for years. And CCP has been pretty clear on why they won't change it. And honestly, they have bigger fish to fry anyways.. PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!! THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!!
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.03.17 20:16:00 - [23] Originally by: Robert Caldera Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 19:52:42 Originally by: Tellenta IT'S NOT REALLY A MAJOR GAME PLAY FLAW being unable to distinguish 2 main groups of blueprint items easily and having a lot of annoying work sorting the sht out, once mixed accidentally, is a major flaw for me. Originally by:* Tellenta Typed in caps so you could hear me. FU All right, sorry about that I had just gotten back from work and was working (I know right) on something that required caps-lock to be engaged, deal with it. I will stand by your assertion that having an at-a-glance ability to distinguish BPO's from BPC's would be rather nice, however as a previous poster provided CCP is either unable, or haven't gotten around to making that a reality. I can accept that, considering that if I lose my BPO amongst my BPC's all I have to do is show info on the first or last BPO/C of that bunch to find it again, it really is not that hard, annoying? sure but hardily something that breaks your back in effort. Quote: being unable to distinguish 2 main groups of blueprint items easily This is a fine example of a false statement, commonly used to try to up the importance of a rather banal subject. also, FU2
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.17 20:16:00 - [24] Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 20:23:43 Originally by: Emporer Norton Is easy use divison for bpo another for bpc or 2 containers or if in hanger s&i to sort thru quickly I do too, but sometimes, they accidentally get together, which suddenly causes a lot of annoying work. I know the workarounds, but like I said before, these are only workarounds for a FLAW, which I'd like to see fixed soon! Originally by: Tellenta I can accept that, considering that if I lose my BPO amongst my BPC's all I have to do is show info on the first or last BPO/C of that bunch to find it again if it was that easy, this tactic never worked for me - I had to look infos of each single one of 60 BPs to find my lost 2 BPOs again 2 hours ago.
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.03.17 21:21:00 - [25] Edited by: Tellenta on 17/03/2010 21:21:49 Originally by: Robert Caldera Edited by: Robert Caldera on 17/03/2010 20:23:43 Originally by: Emporer Norton Is easy use divison for bpo another for bpc or 2 containers or if in hanger s&i to sort thru quickly I do too, but sometimes, they accidentally get together, which suddenly causes a lot of annoying work. I know the workarounds, but like I said before, these are only workarounds for a FLAW, which I'd like to see fixed soon! Originally by: Tellenta I can accept that, considering that if I lose my BPO amongst my BPC's all I have to do is show info on the first or last BPO/C of that bunch to find it again if it was that easy, this tactic never worked for me - I had to look infos of each single one of 60 BPs to find my lost 2 BPOs again 2 hours ago. This puzzled me so I did an experiment. It turns out I was mistaken (kinda). I decided to run an experiment to see if I could get a BPO not at the beginning or end of the stack. I had success when I had BPC's from two BPO's however when I had 3 BPO's amongst 60 BPC's something different happened two where where I expected them to be, however the third was not to be found. http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5760/20100317210222.jpg Crap he is right I thought to myself, but there has to be an easier way than looking through all of them! Then I thought to myself, maybe the BPO is somehow attached to the batch of BPC's went up 40 from the bottom (out of 60 similar BPC's) and selected the 41st one http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8504/20100317210346.jpg There it was, great victory! I hope this helps in your future endeavors.
Ruziel Minmatar Twilight Military Industrial Complex	Posted - 2010.03.17 21:26:00 - [26] Originally by: Tellenta d CCP is either unable, or haven't gotten around to making that a reality. It's not that they can't. It's the fact that doing so would add crippling load to the database servers. You are asking to add a table join for a single column that is only relevant to blueprints to the lookup any time a container (be it a station hangar, a ship hold, a cargo container) is opened. The reason they do this on the S&I blueprint tabs, is because they are doing it for only blueprints, and they aren't doing it for a single column, but the ME and PE levels as well.
Tellenta Gallente Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.03.17 21:39:00 - [27] Originally by: Ruziel Originally by: Tellenta d CCP is either unable, or haven't gotten around to making that a reality. It's not that they can't. It's the fact that doing so would add crippling load to the database servers. You are asking to add a table join for a single column that is only relevant to blueprints to the lookup any time a container (be it a station hangar, a ship hold, a cargo container) is opened. The reason they do this on the S&I blueprint tabs, is because they are doing it for only blueprints, and they aren't doing it for a single column, but the ME and PE levels as well. Minor correction, I'm not asking CCP to change anything. I am a happy clam regardless of whether they decide to find a way to determine BPO from BPC from an at a glance way. I fear the repercussions if CCP decides to try fixing some old code like that, jump gates won't work, guns won't fire, dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!!!
Ruziel Minmatar Twilight Military Industrial Complex	Posted - 2010.03.17 22:28:00 - [28] Originally by: Tellenta Minor correction, I'm not asking CCP to change anything. I am a happy clam regardless of whether they decide to find a way to determine BPO from BPC from an at a glance way. I fear the repercussions if CCP decides to try fixing some old code like that, jump gates won't work, guns won't fire, dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!!! My second point was aimed at the OP more than yourself, but I could see the confusion. You are correct that a proper fix to this that does not involve adding a massive DB load, thereby increasing lag, would require a change to the DB structure. Which in turn require rewriting every bit of inventory code that touches it. As anyone familiar with multi-thread and database transaction programming, they have to be extremely careful with the inventory code to prevent item duplication and other exploits. One would hope that a refactoring or optimization of this core code is on the schedule, as with all the other code optimization they have been doing over the last few releases. But to demand that they drop everything and fix it NAO is ill-advised.
ZeeOhSix Blackwater Manufacturing and Logistics	Posted - 2010.03.17 23:40:00 - [29] Note to self; do not hire RC as a DBA :) I would offer that if you have the expertise you claim to, you'd recognize that until you see the schema, you really don't know what's possible and what's not. It may have been a short-sighted design, but we don't really know. It sounds like in the end they treat it as an attribute of an existing object, rather than a seperate object, and I can see why that would be attractive from a system design perspective. OTOH, they did buy one of these for their database ;) http://www.ramsan.com/products/ramsan-400.htm The business of EVE is business!
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.03.18 08:53:00 - [30] absolute normalization is a curse if it comes to performance considerations, its general knowledge - so I cant understand why CCP still sticks to it by all means. Functionality should form the backend, not the other way around, the complaints about this terrible game flaw are there since I've started playing eve.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.