Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |
|
CCP Fallout
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:00:00 -
[1]
Our next dev blog in the "Fixing Lag" series features Atropos famous thin client. Read all about it here.
Fallout Associate Community Manager CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us |
|
Odium Devotus
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:07:00 -
[2]
So if the player base does nothing to help out, that will force you to come up with creative solutions that wind up having other benefits as well?
Sounds like a win/win situation to me. |
Nye Jaran
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:13:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Nye Jaran on 18/08/2010 16:13:13 Um yeah, about that ASCII logo... it's not exactly what I would call SFW.
I mean, I know what it is, but if a coworker walked by and caught a glance of it, well, there'd be some 'splaining to do. I mean, even I did a double take before it fully registered.
|
NupetietVer
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:15:00 -
[4]
Can I haz thin client to fit on my 4gb flashdrive so I can do market trading in class again?
|
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:23:00 -
[5]
meh.....
it needs a follow up so that we can see the fruits for your labor!
|
Regat Kozovv
Caldari Alcothology
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:27:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Atropos There's also turning a herd (flock? what do you call a group of these things? an army?)
I believe the scientifically-correct term would be a "blob".
Keep up the great work.
Originally by: CCP Atropos THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS.
|
Krispy Dingo
Minmatar Strangers in a Strange Land
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:27:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Krispy Dingo on 18/08/2010 16:31:30
Originally by: CCP Atropos There's also turning a herd (flock? what do you call a group of these things? an army?)
i believe the appropriate term is a murder. like crows.
fully understand the need for using real live people instead of just your thin clients. no matter how much you try to emulate the stupidity a human being can come up with, you never will.
now if only mass testing didn't happen when i was at work, or could at least be moved to my lunch time. _____________________________ http://twitter.com/krispy_dingo http://krispydingo.com |
Axemaster
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:27:00 -
[8]
This, tbh, is probably going to become one of CCP's most important development tools, if they get it right.
Some questions:
1. Are you making a "control program" where the actions of the bot are statistically based on the actions of players? Not just the random chance of pushing a button at some time, but also the chance of undertaking some actions in a certain order? And also, do they emulate the way players tend to start mashing buttons when lag starts to kick in? (in my opinion, that might be part of why lag tends to kick in suddenly, rather than gradually)
2. You should really consider setting up something similar to BOINC (or even use BOINC itself). Players could download and run a program, and the thin clients would be able to use a certain specifiable amount of cpu, RAM, and network speed. That way you could take network latency and internet routing issues into account as well, in the most realistic way possible.
3. You should reconsider allowing the thin client into the wild - if you do the BOINC thing, you could make it have a "mass-test mode" where each player could have one primary ship, which would run the normal graphics client, and control some other ships as well, like in a squad. That way you could make more realistic testing and also have as many ships as you need.
4. Is there any chance you could put a vid up on youtube so we can see the thin client in action? (in station, in battle etc.) I really want to see your ASCII graphics!
|
Larkonis Trassler
Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:27:00 -
[9]
Quite interesting. A pity you're not putting it out to the masses. I was rubbing my hands with glee, as I'm sure were many of our Oriental brothers, at the thought of a 'lite' client for certain tasks but it's probably for the best.
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:32:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Zendoren meh.....
it needs a follow up so that we can see the fruits for your labor!
There are other developers doing exactly that
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
electrostatus
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:35:00 -
[11]
The next stop for the thin client, eve on MS-DOS! Even fits on a 5.25" disk! ― Vexo M > He turned the drives up to 11 |
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:37:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Axemaster This, tbh, is probably going to become one of CCP's most important development tools, if they get it right.
Some questions:
1. Are you making a "control program" where the actions of the bot are statistically based on the actions of players? Not just the random chance of pushing a button at some time, but also the chance of undertaking some actions in a certain order? And also, do they emulate the way players tend to start mashing buttons when lag starts to kick in? (in my opinion, that might be part of why lag tends to kick in suddenly, rather than gradually)
2. You should really consider setting up something similar to BOINC (or even use BOINC itself). Players could download and run a program, and the thin clients would be able to use a certain specifiable amount of cpu, RAM, and network speed. That way you could take network latency and internet routing issues into account as well, in the most realistic way possible.
3. You should reconsider allowing the thin client into the wild - if you do the BOINC thing, you could make it have a "mass-test mode" where each player could have one primary ship, which would run the normal graphics client, and control some other ships as well, like in a squad. That way you could make more realistic testing and also have as many ships as you need.
4. Is there any chance you could put a vid up on youtube so we can see the thin client in action? (in station, in battle etc.) I really want to see your ASCII graphics!
The thin client doesn't have a UI beyond what I showed, and that was simply a console print out, and not interactive. I'll poke CCP Veritas about a video, since he's got a blog inbound that should cover the actual use of the thin clients in tracking down some of the lag causes.
I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:41:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Odium Devotus So if the player base does nothing to help out, that will force you to come up with creative solutions that wind up having other benefits as well?
Sounds like a win/win situation to me.
Are you saying that your fellow players can be imitated with mindless automatons?
On a more serious note, the mass tests and the thin client are both required still, just as debugging directly on tranquility is. There is overlap between what the mass testing and thin clients can provide but it isn't that much.
Like, a mass test can't repeat the exact same scenario again and again, while the thin client can't imitate 500 players playing out a fleet fight.
However, we fully intend to allow the thin clients to take over the earth if it deems it necessary to do so to save it.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:43:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Krispy Dingo Edited by: Krispy Dingo on 18/08/2010 16:31:30
Originally by: CCP Atropos There's also turning a herd (flock? what do you call a group of these things? an army?)
i believe the appropriate term is a murder. like crows.
fully understand the need for using real live people instead of just your thin clients. no matter how much you try to emulate the stupidity a human being can come up with, you never will.
now if only mass testing didn't happen when i was at work, or could at least be moved to my lunch time.
Real HumansÖ are infinitely more adaptable at breaking our fixes and showing us the where the flaws are. It's akin to one mind solving a problem and trying to think like 200 others, as opposed to 200 different minds trying to break the problem; you simply can't compete. As a result of that, we will always need the mass tests, to ensure we've actually fixed what we set out to fix.
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:46:00 -
[15]
Originally by: CCP Atropos
Originally by: Krispy Dingo Edited by: Krispy Dingo on 18/08/2010 16:31:30
Originally by: CCP Atropos There's also turning a herd (flock? what do you call a group of these things? an army?)
i believe the appropriate term is a murder. like crows.
fully understand the need for using real live people instead of just your thin clients. no matter how much you try to emulate the stupidity a human being can come up with, you never will.
now if only mass testing didn't happen when i was at work, or could at least be moved to my lunch time.
Real HumansÖ are infinitely more adaptable at breaking our fixes and showing us the where the flaws are. It's akin to one mind solving a problem and trying to think like 200 others, as opposed to 200 different minds trying to break the problem; you simply can't compete. As a result of that, we will always need the mass tests, to ensure we've actually fixed what we set out to fix.
I like your explanation better. We should change the name of the thin client to Fake HumanÖ
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
Cryodeus
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:49:00 -
[16]
Quote: I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Do you think that in an upcoming blog you could post some non invasive photographs of where my capsuleer sleeps when i'm not playing eve?
whenever i hear you guys talk about upgrading the server the mental image i have is one or two little desktop pc towers acting as the server. i certainly know that this isn't the case.
you might not be able to post anything like that because ooo i don't want anyone to copy us or ooo i'm too scared people will steal out secret inventions of world domination.
whatever the reason, all i'm saying is is that i think it would be cool to see where our universe is contained. we see in the inside of it all the time, i kinda want a glimpse of the outside.
|
Stick Cult
Unspoken Autonomy.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:56:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Stick Cult on 18/08/2010 16:55:58
Originally by: Cryodeus
Quote: I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Do you think that in an upcoming blog you could post some non invasive photographs of where my capsuleer sleeps when i'm not playing eve?
whenever i hear you guys talk about upgrading the server the mental image i have is one or two little desktop pc towers acting as the server. i certainly know that this isn't the case.
you might not be able to post anything like that because ooo i don't want anyone to copy us or ooo i'm too scared people will steal out secret inventions of world domination.
whatever the reason, all i'm saying is is that i think it would be cool to see where our universe is contained. we see in the inside of it all the time, i kinda want a glimpse of the outside.
I'd like to see a blog about TQ, complete with pictures... I'm sure there's one coming up. In the mean time, [url=http://www.blogcdn.com/www.massively.com/media/2010/06/cold.jpg]here's one[/url]. I can't remember if this is the old place or the new one, but it is A picture... Also not that exciting, just a bunch of cabinets with servers in em...
Originally by: CCP Tuxford my bad. Rest assured I'm being ridiculed by my co-workers.
|
Chard Kalan
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:00:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Cryodeus
Quote: I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Do you think that in an upcoming blog you could post some non invasive photographs of where my capsuleer sleeps when i'm not playing eve?
whenever i hear you guys talk about upgrading the server the mental image i have is one or two little desktop pc towers acting as the server. i certainly know that this isn't the case.
you might not be able to post anything like that because ooo i don't want anyone to copy us or ooo i'm too scared people will steal out secret inventions of world domination.
whatever the reason, all i'm saying is is that i think it would be cool to see where our universe is contained. we see in the inside of it all the time, i kinda want a glimpse of the outside.
It's a data center. Raised floor with tiny little holes in parts, large AC unit, and 6' metal 'shelves' full of servers. Really nothing special to see.
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:01:00 -
[19]
Quote: Mocking, Mock Objects, Subclassing...In a lot of these cases, we're reviewing and touching on older code and so we are getting ancillary benefits from reviewing these files from a more up-to-date viewpoint.
Very cool. This approach has the advantage that it allows you to seamlessly stay up to date with upgrades to the client too. I like the approach. :)
Quote: Unfortunately when you run a few hundred of these at the same time, even minor CPU fluctuations, occurring across every client at the same time, can cause problems, so it's something we're keen to keep to a minimum.
Yeah, I can totally see this being super problematic. A system process which stole the CPU for a few seconds could cut server load in half because all of your clients are running on only a couple of machines! It also seems like you're limiting yourself to testing the server when everyone has similar ping times and fully functioning internet connections. Have you considered a flag on the thin client to introduce "fake lag" and possibly packet loss?
I can totally believe that mass tests are still going to be required - for example how else are you going to find problems like the decloaking Proteus which made everyone crash to desktop? IIRC you guys fixed this when you fixed the T3 shader/texture memory leak.
-Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
|
Gil Danastre
Amarr Robur in Arma
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:01:00 -
[20]
So if currently the thin client has a footprint of 200ish MB of memory, what are you intending to run it on? Custom building a RAM monster box or somesuch? Also, I assume these clients still can connect to the server, would we see them in space if that was the case?
|
|
Aldariandra
Gallente This will look bad on your killboard Capital Storm
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:01:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Aldariandra on 18/08/2010 17:02:02
Originally by: Stick Cult Edited by: Stick Cult on 18/08/2010 16:55:58
Originally by: Cryodeus
Quote: I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Do you think that in an upcoming blog you could post some non invasive photographs of where my capsuleer sleeps when i'm not playing eve?
whenever i hear you guys talk about upgrading the server the mental image i have is one or two little desktop pc towers acting as the server. i certainly know that this isn't the case.
you might not be able to post anything like that because ooo i don't want anyone to copy us or ooo i'm too scared people will steal out secret inventions of world domination.
whatever the reason, all i'm saying is is that i think it would be cool to see where our universe is contained. we see in the inside of it all the time, i kinda want a glimpse of the outside.
I'd like to see a blog about TQ, complete with pictures... I'm sure there's one coming up. In the mean time, [url=http://www.blogcdn.com/www.massively.com/media/2010/06/cold.jpg]here's one[/url]. I can't remember if this is the old place or the new one, but it is A picture... Also not that exciting, just a bunch of cabinets with servers in em...
There is a picture of the new place on the following two articles, both worth reading if you are into that kinda stuff: http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/06/16/closer-look-eve-onlines-new-server-cluster/ http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=769
|
Luke S
Zeta Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:05:00 -
[22]
I'm not sure If I fully understand. When you mean by testing the code. do you mean testing the code on the server side or client side?
Just out of curiosity. But has someone in CCP said the doomed words yet? "why not start from scratch and rebuild a new eve?" ---
|
ElfeGER
Versatech Co. Blade.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:08:00 -
[23]
about time this thing went from an idea to a real tool btw. something like this is also a nice idea
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:14:00 -
[24]
Originally by: NupetietVer Can I haz thin client to fit on my 4gb flashdrive so I can do market trading in class again?
+1, don't need 3D graphics or audio (obligatory: eve has sound?) for most of my gameplay anyway, would love to have a less fat client available! --
|
Stick Cult
Unspoken Autonomy.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:15:00 -
[25]
Nice blog. I just love the idea of having 100s of mindless titans doing my bidding...
Originally by: CCP Tuxford my bad. Rest assured I'm being ridiculed by my co-workers.
|
Casiella Truza
Ecliptic Rift
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:24:00 -
[26]
Despite the pre-emptive denial, I really wouldn't mind a command-line client for chat, trade, and science/industry.
Can't blame a pilot for asking!
--
|
Aldariandra
Gallente This will look bad on your killboard Capital Storm
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:26:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Quite interesting. A pity you're not putting it out to the masses. I was rubbing my hands with glee, as I'm sure were many of our Oriental brothers, at the thought of a 'lite' client for certain tasks but it's probably for the best.
By the sounds of it, you need other software to control its actions. It probably doesn't even have command-line instructions to make things happen in the game but instead an API that outside control software talks to to make it do things. All I would ever expect to see on the console screen was "Running.." and maybe some commands to run it in different modes or connect to a different cluster.
Releasing something like this to the public would cause all kinds of problems. First and foremost, because its made to be programatically controlled, it could be exploited and used as farming bots very easily, far more easily that is possible with the current GUI client. Due to its small size, it could be mass-deployed and used in combination with trail accounts create massive insta-fleets, and the like. It really isn't a tool you want out there.
|
Odium Devotus
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:32:00 -
[28]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Are you saying that your fellow players can be imitated with mindless automatons?
No no, not implying that at all. Just seems like this tool should have been developed long before the players couldn't be bothered to help fix the game they love, as 'lag' has always been a problem.
There seems to be some great tools and solutions that have been cropping up, or are around the corner. The thin client, AND making sisi more accessible to the less tech savvy folks is a great step in the right direction.
Everyone has been doing a great job listening to what the community has had to say. I appreciate the efforts, and look forward to what the future has in store |
Manfred Rickenbocker
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:34:00 -
[29]
Awwww maaaaaaan! I wanna play EVE Text Adventure too! ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:49:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Ban Doga on 18/08/2010 17:49:18 Once the feature page for Tyrannis contained a hint about an automated stress testing framework using "Thin clients", as preserved in a user postings here or here.
I assume the thin clients mentioned in this blog are exactly those. Is there a reason you removed them from the feature page and re-advertise them now?
|
|
RentableMuffin
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 17:53:00 -
[31]
I want a thin client!
|
Hexxx
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:01:00 -
[32]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
However, we fully intend to allow the thin clients to take over the earth if it deems it necessary to do so to save it.
Yes. A thousand times yes. Projects Blog |
Faolan Fortune
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:04:00 -
[33]
Whoah, that's pretty impressive stuff.
So I take it with these little helpers, you'll be able to test new game mechanics and such and their performance impact while in development?
Also are you thinking of developing something similar for Incarna, to test the performance impact of a stupid amount of avatars in a station? You think Jita is laggy on the outside...
|
dracozna
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:31:00 -
[34]
Interesting read :) polish it up with interesting:"It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue." and we have a working linux client ;-) (had to say it)
Wasn't orchestrator also used for the Tyrannis and Dominion trailers? I believe it was mentioned in one of the movies during the last alliance tournament. tonight, we mine in Hek |
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:31:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Luke S I'm not sure If I fully understand. When you mean by testing the code. do you mean testing the code on the server side or client side?
It can be used for both to certain extent but it's primarily thought for simulating load on the server.
Originally by: Luke S Just out of curiosity. But has someone in CCP said the doomed words yet? "why not start from scratch and rebuild a new eve?"
So if you thought 18 months was a long time ...
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
Bomberlocks
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:34:00 -
[36]
Thank you too for the interesting and detailed, Blog, Atropos. I have one small question:
1. I assume you already do this, but do you have tests with the thin client where the client is simply set to roam around a set of systems or regions for long periods of time? The reason I ask this is because I wonder it wouldn't help you on the elusive issue of narrowing down the issue of lag occurring in even empty systems that are not even on the same node as a heavily loaded system?
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:43:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Bomberlocks Thank you too for the interesting and detailed, Blog, Atropos. I have one small question:
1. I assume you already do this, but do you have tests with the thin client where the client is simply set to roam around a set of systems or regions for long periods of time? The reason I ask this is because I wonder it wouldn't help you on the elusive issue of narrowing down the issue of lag occurring in even empty systems that are not even on the same node as a heavily loaded system?
This is where we're aiming for, so, no, we don't have these tests, yet. We're working on the framework to control the clients such that we can set up nightly jobs gathering the performance data, of various activities. The whole idea is to do it in a structured manner so we can methodically narrow down what the issues are.
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:49:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Aldariandra
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Quite interesting. A pity you're not putting it out to the masses. I was rubbing my hands with glee, as I'm sure were many of our Oriental brothers, at the thought of a 'lite' client for certain tasks but it's probably for the best.
By the sounds of it, you need other software to control its actions. It probably doesn't even have command-line instructions to make things happen in the game but instead an API that outside control software talks to to make it do things. All I would ever expect to see on the console screen was "Running.." and maybe some commands to run it in different modes or connect to a different cluster.
Releasing something like this to the public would cause all kinds of problems. First and foremost, because its made to be programatically controlled, it could be exploited and used as farming bots very easily, far more easily that is possible with the current GUI client. Due to its small size, it could be mass-deployed and used in combination with trail accounts create massive insta-fleets, and the like. It really isn't a tool you want out there.
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
Traspace
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:50:00 -
[39]
How about for the thin client control pull a page from Enders game and the whole remote fleet battles.
Some sort of RTS-like controller then have in office fleet fights :D While it's a p.i.t.a. to manage dozens or hundreds of ships as one person would add an element of unpredictability for fleet fights. Bringing it that much closer to simulating 500 HumansÖ going crazy on each other.
|
Lykouleon
Trust Doesn't Rust Mostly Cookie
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:52:00 -
[40]
Quote: If you start up a normal EVE client it doesn't suddenly start trying to take over the world ala SkyNet (hopefully)
Lies and slander, its in CCP's founding documents that the company will slowly take over the world using a massive combination of EVE clients and the awesome/fearful power of the Tranquility cluster.
Get out of my head, Charles! [/tinfoil]
Quote: Aedun Sole > flying with lyk is like flying a bus filled with 5 year old children
|
|
Kurisu Makkashi
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:52:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Manfred Rickenbocker Awwww maaaaaaan! I wanna play EVE Text Adventure too!
Hahahaha, it would be cool to have a client that was "flat".
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Ban Doga Edited by: Ban Doga on 18/08/2010 17:49:18 Once the feature page for Tyrannis contained a hint about an automated stress testing framework using "Thin clients", as preserved in a user postings here or here.
I assume the thin clients mentioned in this blog are exactly those. Is there a reason you removed them from the feature page and re-advertise them now?
Yes they are. Why they were removed, I have no idea. Probably because it's an internal tool and they don't really belong on a feature page.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
Luke S
Zeta Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:14:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Luke S Just out of curiosity. But has someone in CCP said the doomed words yet? "why not start from scratch and rebuild a new eve?"
So if you thought 18 months was a long time ...
Ok so, you are doing a MAJOR fix expansion. Not tossing the old client and start over. GOOD LUCK! you'll need it! ---
|
Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:35:00 -
[44]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
[bolded notable part.]
OK, that got me very curious. Sounds like you're considering some re-work of API after all?
As for the post itself, thanks. Though I saw the basic notes for this in the GD thread, its nice to have it fleshed out a bit more.
|
Sessym
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:35:00 -
[45]
I wonder if you are already thought about what I'm going to say, but reading the blog and the posts above, an idea popped into mind. What if you introduced some way to record the requests of the individual clients and then feed them back to one of the control methods on these thin clients? I imagine that would very resource-intensive during the time of recording but, on the other hand, you'd get to play the real thing with the 'robots' over and over. Or even go further, and record a full-scale fight (or market traffic or whatever) from TQ. How does that sound?
0= - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'So grab your guns.' |
Sered Woollahra
Gallente Independent Traders and Builders MPA
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:43:00 -
[46]
I have just logged off my company VPN where we concluded a load and stress test using generated load, so this blog appeals to me. I love reading the technical details in these blogs, thanks and keep them coming..
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 19:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Alain Kinsella
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
[bolded notable part.]
OK, that got me very curious. Sounds like you're considering some re-work of API after all?
As for the post itself, thanks. Though I saw the basic notes for this in the GD thread, its nice to have it fleshed out a bit more.
EVE Gate and the API have been for many years and will continue be part of our strategy for world domination.
What we're experiencing now is that the backend to EVE for the API, EVE Gate etc. has to mature, be secure and scale before they can move forward. This will take a lot of time of trial and error and we are currently doing that through EVE Gate which is moving forward the bi-directional use of said backend (as opposed to the single-direction API).
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:22:00 -
[48]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Aldariandra
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Quite interesting. A pity you're not putting it out to the masses. I was rubbing my hands with glee, as I'm sure were many of our Oriental brothers, at the thought of a 'lite' client for certain tasks but it's probably for the best.
By the sounds of it, you need other software to control its actions. It probably doesn't even have command-line instructions to make things happen in the game but instead an API that outside control software talks to to make it do things. All I would ever expect to see on the console screen was "Running.." and maybe some commands to run it in different modes or connect to a different cluster.
Releasing something like this to the public would cause all kinds of problems. First and foremost, because its made to be programatically controlled, it could be exploited and used as farming bots very easily, far more easily that is possible with the current GUI client. Due to its small size, it could be mass-deployed and used in combination with trail accounts create massive insta-fleets, and the like. It really isn't a tool you want out there.
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
Actually, CCP Oveur, you didn't answer the question, and have kind of confused the issue now The Thin Client is a wrapped version of the game, to control it we've had to create an API, as you correctly surmised, that interfaces with the the game code. The API we use is still considered as part of the game, in that it is in the same codebase, but is only used to do simple things such as dock/undock/activate module and so on.
As I mentioned in my blog, we can run it in one of two ways, either being dictated to from a central controller, or by being given a simple script to execute. I want to extend this to allow more room for the clients to make up their own mind on what activity to undertake, so that they can form arbitrary fleets, and go roaming, or if fitted with, say, mining lasers, go find a belt and mine, and so forth.
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:23:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Lykouleon
Quote: If you start up a normal EVE client it doesn't suddenly start trying to take over the world ala SkyNet (hopefully)
Lies and slander, its in CCP's founding documents that the company will slowly take over the world using a massive combination of EVE clients and the awesome/fearful power of the Tranquility cluster.
Get out of my head, Charles! [/tinfoil]
Hence the title of my blog
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:24:00 -
[50]
Originally by: CCP Atropos
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Aldariandra
Originally by: Larkonis Trassler Quite interesting. A pity you're not putting it out to the masses. I was rubbing my hands with glee, as I'm sure were many of our Oriental brothers, at the thought of a 'lite' client for certain tasks but it's probably for the best.
By the sounds of it, you need other software to control its actions. It probably doesn't even have command-line instructions to make things happen in the game but instead an API that outside control software talks to to make it do things. All I would ever expect to see on the console screen was "Running.." and maybe some commands to run it in different modes or connect to a different cluster.
Releasing something like this to the public would cause all kinds of problems. First and foremost, because its made to be programatically controlled, it could be exploited and used as farming bots very easily, far more easily that is possible with the current GUI client. Due to its small size, it could be mass-deployed and used in combination with trail accounts create massive insta-fleets, and the like. It really isn't a tool you want out there.
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
Actually, CCP Oveur, you didn't answer the question, and have kind of confused the issue now The Thin Client is a wrapped version of the game, to control it we've had to create an API, as you correctly surmised, that interfaces with the the game code. The API we use is still considered as part of the game, in that it is in the same codebase, but is only used to do simple things such as dock/undock/activate module and so on.
As I mentioned in my blog, we can run it in one of two ways, either being dictated to from a central controller, or by being given a simple script to execute. I want to extend this to allow more room for the clients to make up their own mind on what activity to undertake, so that they can form arbitrary fleets, and go roaming, or if fitted with, say, mining lasers, go find a belt and mine, and so forth.
I said unicorns died when I got technical.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:28:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Sessym I wonder if you are already thought about what I'm going to say, but reading the blog and the posts above, an idea popped into mind. What if you introduced some way to record the requests of the individual clients and then feed them back to one of the control methods on these thin clients? I imagine that would very resource-intensive during the time of recording but, on the other hand, you'd get to play the real thing with the 'robots' over and over. Or even go further, and record a full-scale fight (or market traffic or whatever) from TQ. How does that sound?
It certainly is something we've considered. We've got tools, internally, that allow us to record the visual aspects of a client, such as play this visual effect, then play this one, but as I say, they're only for the visual effects.
In the scenario you talk about we would want to tackle the technical causes of lag, and so we would have to record the actual commands sent to the server, which is a much more involved task. It's by no means impossible, and it's something I want to do, just not now
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
Ix Forres
Caldari Righteous Chaps
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:31:00 -
[52]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Alain Kinsella
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
[bolded notable part.]
OK, that got me very curious. Sounds like you're considering some re-work of API after all?
As for the post itself, thanks. Though I saw the basic notes for this in the GD thread, its nice to have it fleshed out a bit more.
EVE Gate and the API have been for many years and will continue be part of our strategy for world domination.
What we're experiencing now is that the backend to EVE for the API, EVE Gate etc. has to mature, be secure and scale before they can move forward. This will take a lot of time of trial and error and we are currently doing that through EVE Gate which is moving forward the bi-directional use of said backend (as opposed to the single-direction API).
What are your thoughts on sensible use of developer time invested in the API versus EVE Gate, where you get a huge magnification effect on actual end user experience improvement through developing the API further compared to developing EVE Gate?
Is a bi-directional API on the table? What timescale are you considering for making the current EVE Gate functionality available in real APIs for developers? Given the slow (Some would say abysmal) take-up of EVE Gate within the community, have your intentions changed on that project? Given the team of (10?) developers who took years to produce it, compared to the one-man-few-months-on-the-side approach that was all the API required, what realistically is the point in pouring considerable resources into EVE Gate or at least what is the justification for not providing similar resources to the API?
I'm genuinely curious and would love to strike up a conversation here, given that myself and others have spent the best part of two years trying to communicate our views to CCP and the result has been essentially silence.
It's nice to hear $words on how CCP wants to improve the API and such, but we old cynics (third party developers) have been hearing the same song for several years now with nearly no change whatsoever to the API since the first major iteration by CCP Garthagk back in the good 'ol days. I know I speak for a few when I say that we're a little tired of the song, and we could use a change. -- Ix Forres - 3rd Party Application Developer - EVE Metrics - accVIEW
|
Kyra Felann
Gallente Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:47:00 -
[53]
Man, I for one, would like a thin client. Text-only would be nice so I could log on to chat or something on my netbook or in a console window while doing something else.
Plus, I could pretend I was playing EVE MUD (TM). -----SIGNATURE-----
Originally by: CCP Ginger Ships have crews, most pod controlled frigates do not, above that they have crews of varying sizes. Hope that helps.
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 20:51:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Ix Forres
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Alain Kinsella
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Pretty much. Also, we simply intend to provide the asynchronous and simplified functionality you are looking for on different platforms and you'll see it first on EVE Gate.
This is actually one of the main purposes for EVE Gate. It's the springboard for new platforms. Exposing EVE functionality for EVE Gate and the API means it's easier to extend to new platforms.
[bolded notable part.]
OK, that got me very curious. Sounds like you're considering some re-work of API after all?
As for the post itself, thanks. Though I saw the basic notes for this in the GD thread, its nice to have it fleshed out a bit more.
EVE Gate and the API have been for many years and will continue be part of our strategy for world domination.
What we're experiencing now is that the backend to EVE for the API, EVE Gate etc. has to mature, be secure and scale before they can move forward. This will take a lot of time of trial and error and we are currently doing that through EVE Gate which is moving forward the bi-directional use of said backend (as opposed to the single-direction API).
What are your thoughts on sensible use of developer time invested in the API versus EVE Gate, where you get a huge magnification effect on actual end user experience improvement through developing the API further compared to developing EVE Gate?
Is a bi-directional API on the table? What timescale are you considering for making the current EVE Gate functionality available in real APIs for developers? Given the slow (Some would say abysmal) take-up of EVE Gate within the community, have your intentions changed on that project? Given the team of (10?) developers who took years to produce it, compared to the one-man-few-months-on-the-side approach that was all the API required, what realistically is the point in pouring considerable resources into EVE Gate or at least what is the justification for not providing similar resources to the API?
I'm genuinely curious and would love to strike up a conversation here, given that myself and others have spent the best part of two years trying to communicate our views to CCP and the result has been essentially silence.
It's nice to hear $words on how CCP wants to improve the API and such, but we old cynics (third party developers) have been hearing the same song for several years now with nearly no change whatsoever to the API since the first major iteration by CCP Garthagk back in the good 'ol days. I know I speak for a few when I say that we're a little tired of the song, and we could use a change.
The irony is that what took so long to get EVE Gate out is the backend work required to enable the bi-directional capabilities to Tranquility, making it scale, the associated quite hefty hardware investment in caching and other infrastructure is what will enable the API to move forward.
We wouldn't have started putting these resources on doing that had it not been for EVE Gate and then API would never have evolved to even remotely bi-directional.
So while you might not see or appreciate the long-term potential and ambition behind EVE Gate right now, it is paving the way for the API moving beyond something a "one-man-few-months-on-the-side" effort would have given.
My second point in my previous answer was also scalability and security. We canceled EVE Mobile, the first bi-directional interface to the cluster. Not because the client was difficult but because it could crash the Tranquility cluster, it could hack it, it could easily topple it with load. So the work required to get that part working was tremendous.
That's why doing it through EVE Gate first, creating the infrastructure around it is the prudent way of doing it.
So yeah, let's not hate EVE Gate, it's paving the way for many things which otherwise wouldn't have happened or would have happened much slower.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
Trhamp Sthamp
Caldari EVE Corporation1428
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:01:00 -
[55]
That client is fine and dandy but why go through so much trouble describing it if we aren't actually going to use it? Hell, I'd use that client at work if I could use text commands to do most things. Even if I had to remain in a station, it's still useful. Imagine making a thin client like that to do skill swaps nearly anywhere or even update market orders and contracts.
-TS
|
Emo Dodo
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:10:00 -
[56]
Since you have the control part of the client de-coupled - that surely could be the basis for leightweight clients? It is an awesom idea. Imagine for instance a client that weights only like 100mb, or streams whatever small art content it needs. It could accessed in a browser enviroment.
|
Ix Forres
Caldari Righteous Chaps
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:14:00 -
[57]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
Originally by: Ix Forres What are your thoughts on sensible use of developer time invested in the API versus EVE Gate, where you get a huge magnification effect on actual end user experience improvement through developing the API further compared to developing EVE Gate?
Is a bi-directional API on the table? What timescale are you considering for making the current EVE Gate functionality available in real APIs for developers? Given the slow (Some would say abysmal) take-up of EVE Gate within the community, have your intentions changed on that project? Given the team of (10?) developers who took years to produce it, compared to the one-man-few-months-on-the-side approach that was all the API required, what realistically is the point in pouring considerable resources into EVE Gate or at least what is the justification for not providing similar resources to the API?
I'm genuinely curious and would love to strike up a conversation here, given that myself and others have spent the best part of two years trying to communicate our views to CCP and the result has been essentially silence.
It's nice to hear $words on how CCP wants to improve the API and such, but we old cynics (third party developers) have been hearing the same song for several years now with nearly no change whatsoever to the API since the first major iteration by CCP Garthagk back in the good 'ol days. I know I speak for a few when I say that we're a little tired of the song, and we could use a change.
The irony is that what took so long to get EVE Gate out is the backend work required to enable the bi-directional capabilities to Tranquility, making it scale, the associated quite hefty hardware investment in caching and other infrastructure is what will enable the API to move forward.
We wouldn't have started putting these resources on doing that had it not been for EVE Gate and then API would never have evolved to even remotely bi-directional.
So while you might not see or appreciate the long-term potential and ambition behind EVE Gate right now, it is paving the way for the API moving beyond something a "one-man-few-months-on-the-side" effort would have given.
My second point in my previous answer was also scalability and security. We canceled EVE Mobile, the first bi-directional interface to the cluster. Not because the client was difficult but because it could crash the Tranquility cluster, it could hack it, it could easily topple it with load. So the work required to get that part working was tremendous.
That's why doing it through EVE Gate first, creating the infrastructure around it is the prudent way of doing it.
So yeah, let's not hate EVE Gate, it's paving the way for many things which otherwise wouldn't have happened or would have happened much slower.
Okay, I accept that improving bidirectional intracluster communication infrastructure is a sensible move for CCP, and yes, the API requires infrastructure to be added for it to develop. But why choose EVE Gate as the prime mover when the API would have sufficed? "We're going to put 10 people on making this awesome IPC tech for the cluster to talk to the API" would've probably made far more people happier than "We're making Spacebook!".
My original question was really as to why the API has not been given the same or higher level of priority within CCP as EVE Gate when the end result for the playerbase is much, much more positive than EVE Gate. This isn't hating on EVE Gate- EVE Gate is very useful for me as someone who doesn't log in except for EVEmails, and I'm sure lots of people like it- but it is a statement of fact that we'd have achieved the same functionality ten times over with more bells and whistles on like IMAP/POP/SMTP to EVEmail gateways etc if it'd been done in APIs. And you'd have had less internal development time taken up with it, and if you wanted to make a website after the fact, your devs have all the APIs they need already! -- Ix Forres - 3rd Party Application Developer - EVE Metrics - accVIEW
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy Spreadsheets Online
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:49:00 -
[58]
Release the thin client so we can use it? ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe.
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:54:00 -
[59]
Edited by: CCP Oveur on 18/08/2010 21:55:05
Originally by: Ix Forres
Okay, I accept that improving bidirectional intracluster communication infrastructure is a sensible move for CCP, and yes, the API requires infrastructure to be added for it to develop. But why choose EVE Gate as the prime mover when the API would have sufficed? "We're going to put 10 people on making this awesome IPC tech for the cluster to talk to the API" would've probably made far more people happier than "We're making Spacebook!".
My original question was really as to why the API has not been given the same or higher level of priority within CCP as EVE Gate when the end result for the playerbase is much, much more positive than EVE Gate. This isn't hating on EVE Gate- EVE Gate is very useful for me as someone who doesn't log in except for EVEmails, and I'm sure lots of people like it- but it is a statement of fact that we'd have achieved the same functionality ten times over with more bells and whistles on like IMAP/POP/SMTP to EVEmail gateways etc if it'd been done in APIs. And you'd have had less internal development time taken up with it, and if you wanted to make a website after the fact, your devs have all the APIs they need already!
Sorry, was pretty sure I answered that, still at work and very tired. I'll try to be more clear.
EVE Mobile was something we controlled and bi-directional. It didn't justify the investment to the cluster.
API was born in the meantime out of the character sheet. It's usage is not under our control. We have learnt that it can easily crash the cluster in many shapes and form. And that's read only. It alone does not justify the cost in the cluster.
EVE Gate is something we control. It does justify the cost and investment in the cluster.
So it wasn't a choice between EVE Gate OR the API because EVE Gates purpose is far more than it's bi-directional connection to EVE. The choice was, "with this approach we can accelerate any devices bi-directional access to Tranquility while doing EVE Gate", which has to be done regardless. It could have been to "let's make EVE Gate" and not have the API benefit from this work.
So no, it isn't a statement of fact that you would have had evemail up and running faster had we put the EVE Gate team on just developing the API. You would have lots of more options and you could read a lot more data but it would most certainly not be a bi-directional service today.
Why? Because even after all this effort, the scalability and security is achieved in a very purpose built and controlled environment and considerable work is still required to turn all that work into an open API.
And I prefer finishing that work while minimizing risk to the Tranquility cluster.
I don't know how I can put it simpler than that and I hope it answered your question. If not, feel free to continue asking
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
wr3cks
Reliables Inc Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:05:00 -
[60]
These book reports on anti-lag efforts are interesting. We look forward to seeing the results.
Meanwhile, many of us are expecting some sort of update on content priorities:
When are you going to "iterate" PI? (clickclick clickclick clickclick...)
Has the relative priority of Eve:Walking in Vampires been reconsidered in light of the more numerous and pressing issues with current gameplay?
|
|
Ix Forres
Caldari Righteous Chaps
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:11:00 -
[61]
Edited by: Ix Forres on 18/08/2010 22:13:42
Originally by: CCP Oveur ... snipforlength ...
EVE Gate is something we control. It does justify the cost and investment in the cluster.
So it wasn't a choice between EVE Gate OR the API because EVE Gates purpose is far more than it's bi-directional connection to EVE. The choice was, "with this approach we can accelerate any devices bi-directional access to Tranquility while doing EVE Gate", which has to be done regardless. It could have been to "let's make EVE Gate" and not have the API benefit from this work.
So no, it isn't a statement of fact that you would have had evemail up and running faster had we put the EVE Gate team on just developing the API. You would have lots of more options and you could read a lot more data but it would most certainly not be a bi-directional service today.
Why? Because even after all this effort, the scalability and security is achieved in a very purpose built and controlled environment and considerable work is still required to turn all that work into an open API.
And I prefer finishing that work while minimizing risk to the Tranquility cluster.
I don't know how I can put it simpler than that and I hope it answered your question. If not, feel free to continue asking
Okay, thanks for continuing this conversation at the very least.
Still, I'm going to be picky. Hope you don't mind.
The API's usage is entirely controllable by CCP. Any decision not to control this is in CCP's hands, not 3rd party devs. I wasn't aware the API had ever caused issues on the cluster, especially since the SQL Server 2k8 upgrade, which specifically identified being able to impose hard limits on the API as a major plus.
EVE Gate is something you control as much as you control the API. Fundamentally, EVE Gate is just another API; it just has more overhead like stylesheets, page layout information, and so on. The API just has the data, none of that extraneous stuff. Your browser makes GET and POST requests to EVE Gate just like we make to the API. Technically they're extremely similar beasts at heart.
What I fail to see is why out of this list of choices, which as far as I understand from what you're saying, are all valid:
- Make the bi-directional interface and make EVE Gate
- Make the bi-directional interface and improve the API
- Don't make the bi-directional interface and improve the API
... why you seem to treat the second option as if it is impossible, when in reality it involves less work than the first option and results in better output in terms of end-user benefits.
If you assume the API had everything EVE Gate does - and at this point, we're just saying "What if you had no art/webdesign people and just spat XML at browsers?", which imposes no additional constraints on CCP - then we would have those tools, and later iterations of CCP devs could make an official site using those same APIs, maybe using an additional internal API for authentication instead of using API keys. And we'd have the bi-directional interface and the associated cluster stability increasing tools that have been done for EVE Gate, because you could have just as easily made them for the API.
I hope you can see what I'm getting at here; why was the decision made between EVE Gate and the API when the underlying technical requirements are practically identical? Why did CCP choose the option that took additional developer time and resulted in - for the playerbase - a poorer result? And let's face it, let the players choose between EVEmon/EDK and EVE Gate in terms of usefulness - and it's clear what people actually use. If CCP made a killboard now, most people would keep their existing boards. Same deal with skill planners, mail clients, you name it. I'm not saying CCP can't beat the players at making tools for EVE, but why should CCP even bother trying when the players are putting all this (free!) effort into it and doing such a good job already? -- Ix Forres - 3rd Party Application Developer - EVE Metrics - accVIEW
|
Menkala
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:15:00 -
[62]
<lowering the tone>
Hehe, ASCII CCP logo looks like wang and pubes.
</lowering the tone>
|
TornSoul
BIG Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:33:00 -
[63]
Hi Oveur Hi Ix
Seems to me you two might be talking a bit past each other (I could be utterly wrong)
--
What I read Oveur saying (also between the lines), is that (for some reason(*)) CCP decided that EVE Gate was/is to be an important "product". Part of a strategy (? (*)) (I think this is the part Ix might be missing - if true at all. I'm guessing/speculating here)
As such it's "set in stone" that EVE Gate is/will happen (and thus the resources to do so are allocated)
What Oveur then says is that as a beneficial side effect of that happening anyway, a lot of the infrastructure needed for that is also going to happen anyways - and as such will benefit the EVE API in the long run.
---
(*) What strategy or why this is so (i.e. "set in stone")?
How about... A tie-in with the consoles that are needed to play DUST? I.e. EVE Gate (and more?) on the consoles, to bring the EVE players and DUST players more together.
Dunno... just a wild shot in the dark here.
---
Ix if you look at it like that - I.e. that EVE Gate simply has to be - Due to other concerns (afore mentioned strategy), then I think Oveurs answers make more sense - Non?
---
I should add that I too am one of those 3rd party developers (mostly for my own stuff) and that I too am longing (nay *craving*) for some more API love...
And I have pretty much the same "impetus" as Ix : "Just give us the damn data (pref bi-directional) already, and we will make all the tools in the world for you (CCP) - Gratis, as well"
BIG Lottery |
Frug
Omega Wing
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:37:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Ix Forres stuff
Oh stop pressing it. They did eve gate because they can control it, and because they wanted to make evegate anyway (probably a decision influenced by management because they can advertise evegate far easier than they can advertise the existence of an api). Granted it took forever for them to mention anything to you at all about api development and they left you hanging, and granted it took forever for api advancements to happen, but the addition of evegate to the process is hardly a big issue. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor |
Ix Forres
Caldari Righteous Chaps
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 22:52:00 -
[65]
Originally by: TornSoul Hi Oveur Hi Ix
Seems to me you two might be talking a bit past each other (I could be utterly wrong)
--
What I read Oveur saying (also between the lines), is that (for some reason(*)) CCP decided that EVE Gate was/is to be an important "product". Part of a strategy (? (*)) (I think this is the part Ix might be missing - if true at all. I'm guessing/speculating here)
As such it's "set in stone" that EVE Gate is/will happen (and thus the resources to do so are allocated)
What Oveur then says is that as a beneficial side effect of that happening anyway, a lot of the infrastructure needed for that is also going to happen anyways - and as such will benefit the EVE API in the long run.
---
(*) What strategy or why this is so (i.e. "set in stone")?
How about... A tie-in with the consoles that are needed to play DUST? I.e. EVE Gate (and more?) on the consoles, to bring the EVE players and DUST players more together.
Dunno... just a wild shot in the dark here.
---
Ix if you look at it like that - I.e. that EVE Gate simply has to be - Due to other concerns (afore mentioned strategy), then I think Oveurs answers make more sense - Non?
---
I should add that I too am one of those 3rd party developers (mostly for my own stuff) and that I too am longing (nay *craving*) for some more API love...
And I have pretty much the same "impetus" as Ix : "Just give us the damn data (pref bi-directional) already, and we will make all the tools in the world for you (CCP) - Gratis, as well"
Yes, I do get that- my point is more _why_ CCP decided that EVE Gate was an important product in their development cycle and something that they had to do. That's the interesting part here, and something I'd like to hear about. At the end of the day the infrastructure and such like I said is fairly interchangeable between EVE Gate and API, or at least that sounds like where CCP wants to take it. Oveur's answers make sense _if you accept that EVE Gate has to happen_. I make no such assumptions. -- Ix Forres - 3rd Party Application Developer - EVE Metrics - accVIEW
|
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 23:06:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Ix Forres
Okay, thanks for continuing this conversation at the very least.
Still, I'm going to be picky. Hope you don't mind.
snip
Lets start with repeating myself and elaborate to emphasize the point
The decision wasn't made between EVE Gate or the API. EVE Gates purpose includes a lot of things which has absolutely nothing at all to do with the API or it's future incarnations, has functionality which we have to do and operate ourselves and no third party could do for us and it will run services which require high availability as part of our commitment to our customers.
Customer: "I can't use the service because the payment didn't go through and now it's down so I can't change this"
Should I answer "Go talk to Ix Forres, this is not our responsibility"?
I hope this explains clearly why there is no "why EVE Gate instead of the API" or "why not bi-directional and API". There is a subset, which EVE Gate and the API have in common and can mutually benefit from moving forward, the bi-directional interface. That is exactly what is happening.
On the controlled environment and the API. Sure, of course we can control load to some extent but that is just one of so many factors that can cause load. I'm sure you aren't aware what happened and how many times, you aren't in the favorable position I am of having run EVE as a service. With associated phonecalls, hatemails and emorage all the time. Christmas not excluded.
Now imagine the possible problems, where we have the load factors, we have the security issues and we have exploitability of exposing the backend. Now imagine that we're not the one creating the application that uses said interface, we just open it up and are going to wait and see till someone makes an evemail client that uses the API.
I can't take that risk with the Tranquility cluster.
So we decided to use the opportunity that EVE Gate could create for the API. We create the client. We test it all. We control it. Risk is reduced. And I take risk control on Tranquility very seriously because it't not only something I love, it's something that puts food on the table for 600 people.
Lastly - and certainly not least, this isn't about "us" vs "them" in creating an applications for the customers. I'm pretty sure, no let me rephrase, I'm convinced that EVE Gate isn't going to replace things such as EVEMon. Because that's not it's purpose.
We have a set of services we are going to provide to our customers through EVE Gate. Some of them are game functions. Some of them are account functions. Some of them are communication functions. Some of them productivity functions. But they are part of what we have defined as the future basic services we provide.
That's why we have a basic versions, which we operate. There might be a choice for some of them. They could use evemail in EVE Gate or in some other application. But I'm pretty sure account management, PLEX, buddy system, value added services, character creation etc. is not going to go through the API.
So I'm sorry. As much as I wish ... and believe me, I do wish this, I'm paying the bills and watching time tick by ... this just isn't as simple as this. Not in technical terms. Not in financial terms. Not in terms of risk.
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
TornSoul
BIG Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 23:11:00 -
[67]
Edited by: TornSoul on 18/08/2010 23:15:42
Originally by: Ix Forres
Oveur's answers make sense _if you accept that EVE Gate has to happen_. I make no such assumptions.
I admit to making that assumption. Else EVE Gate (and the resources thrown at it) doesn't make much sense imo. (especially in it's current iteration... which is.. well.. meh)
Originally by: Ix Forres
my point is more _why_ CCP decided that EVE Gate was an important product in their development cycle and something that they had to do. That's the interesting part here, and something I'd like to hear about.
The _why_ is very interesting indeed (hopefully...) I'm curious as well.
Edit : No fair. Oveur posting while I was typing Oh well
BIG Lottery |
|
CCP Oveur
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 23:16:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Ix Forres
Yes, I do get that- my point is more _why_ CCP decided that EVE Gate was an important product in their development cycle and something that they had to do. That's the interesting part here, and something I'd like to hear about. At the end of the day the infrastructure and such like I said is fairly interchangeable between EVE Gate and API, or at least that sounds like where CCP wants to take it. Oveur's answers make sense _if you accept that EVE Gate has to happen_. I make no such assumptions.
Originally by: Frug
Originally by: Ix Forres stuff
Oh stop pressing it. They did eve gate because they can control it, and because they wanted to make evegate anyway (probably a decision influenced by management because they can advertise evegate far easier than they can advertise the existence of an api). Granted it took forever for them to mention anything to you at all about api development and they left you hanging, and granted it took forever for api advancements to happen, but the addition of evegate to the process is hardly a big issue.
Yes and no. Addition of EVE Gate is a big deal because it marks a significant shift in CCP's strategy, and one that has been at the partial expense of development of the API, which has left third party developers considerably ****ed off and at the least miffed that CCP has, for all intents and purposes, abandoned the API in terms of actual developments for the best part of 2 years and going on 3 with no communication whatsoever. What we've had added to the API since the good 'ol days (I'm talking mid/late 2007) has been inconsequential and fairly useless. We have things like the EVE Mail API that have been as far as we can tell intentionally pre-nerfed to stop people from replicating EVE Gate's functionality - and that's just read-only functionality (not being able to get mail bodies from the API).
What we have here - somebody actually talking about the API (at long bloody last) is a nice change, but at the end of the day I'll join Mynxee in being impressed and thankful when we see results that merit it. Words are one thing, results are quite another.
Some quick answers before I go home to sleep.
Tornsoul is spot on and I was pretty sure I had made it clear before, EVE Gate happens, regardless of the API. And it's purpose is not to replace any applications which use the API.
I've also talked about the API every year, including at fanfest and other conferences, since 2007.
The technologies are certainly not interchangeable. I wish
The evemail in API isn't nerfed to prevent competition to EVE Gate, that's ridiculous. In fact, it's a stellar example of how careful we're treading around the API.
And I totally agree with you and Mynxee on words vs results. There is a 9 page thread from Friday which I stated the same things repeatedly. Glad we agree
Executive Producer EVE Online
|
|
elissa ferman
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 00:01:00 -
[69]
Great to se someone else is fidling with asyc, mock objects and crazy inheritance stuff ;)
Sounds a bit like my pet project (a bot playing a pretty well known social browser game) and you gave me some nice ideas.
Any information of the loc you had to invest to get the control app in place? Any plans to add some fuzzy logic or ai code inside?
Liz
|
Luke S
Zeta Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 00:03:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Luke S on 19/08/2010 00:03:40 I am shocked on how much blues are posting now. This kicks So much ass! ---
|
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 00:27:00 -
[71]
Originally by: CCP Oveur
The decision wasn't made between EVE Gate or the API. EVE Gates purpose includes a lot of things which has absolutely nothing at all to do with the API or it's future incarnations, has functionality which we have to do and operate ourselves and no third party could do for us and it will run services which require high availability as part of our commitment to our customers. ... We have a set of services we are going to provide to our customers through EVE Gate. Some of them are game functions. Some of them are account functions. Some of them are communication functions. Some of them productivity functions. But they are part of what we have defined as the future basic services we provide.
Hmm. This implies to me that you're basically using Evegate as a springboard to revamp the entire out of game user experience across all of your products - from the forums and subscription management to certain in game features. Man, that honestly sounds pretty awesome.
Quote: I hope this explains clearly why there is no "why EVE Gate instead of the API" or "why not bi-directional and API". There is a subset, which EVE Gate and the API have in common and can mutually benefit from moving forward, the bi-directional interface. That is exactly what is happening.
Does this mean that Evegate and/or the API will eventually become bidirectional - such as able to change skills, update market orders, or perform corp management tasks?
Quote: On the controlled environment and the API. Sure, of course we can control load to some extent but that is just one of so many factors that can cause load. I can't take that risk with the Tranquility cluster.
The funny thing is that as long as the API is read only, its a lot easier to control its access and impact (caching known/frequent API calls to secondary web servers, etc). Once it starts becoming bidirectional, I can see it quickly becoming very very difficult to control that impact. But, I'm not sure that it'll be any harder to control than if someone was scraping Evegate itself.
I guess the difference is that I'd have to trust Ix with my username/password as opposed to my API info? Its a steep barrier, but not incomprehensible.
Quote: That's why we have a basic versions, which we operate. There might be a choice for some of them. They could use evemail in EVE Gate or in some other application. But I'm pretty sure account management, PLEX, buddy system, value added services, character creation etc. is not going to go through the API.
I agree, there's lots of stuff that cannot and should not be trusted to third party application developers. CCP absolutely must maintain direct control of these pieces of information. I also appreciate that you are being very forthcoming about not wanting to kill the Eve API community - I've seen some nasty allegations to the contrary on that.
Also, I hope you guys are considering using standard protocols for some of this. I have *NO IDEA* how most of this is implemented, but I'd personally consider using real email protocols for evemail, IRC for in game chat, etc. Code that you don't have to maintain is a precious precious commodity.
-Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
|
Shaalira D'arc
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 00:34:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Manfred Rickenbocker Awwww maaaaaaan! I wanna play EVE Text Adventure too!
> jump gate There is no "gate" here.
> warp gate Warp drive initiated. Grid loaded. You see a Hurricane, a Hurricane, an elite Gallente frigate wreck, an Ishkur, a Crow, an Amamake gate, a cargo container, a sentry gun, a sentry gun, a sentry gun, and a sentry gun.
> jump gate You cannot jump because of your Global Criminal Countdown. You are being targeted. You are being targeted. You are being targeted.
> shoot Crow You are not targeting a "Crow" A Crow attacks you and hits! 26 damage. You are being warp scrambled. You are being webbed.
> target Crow Targeting crow. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 346 damage. A Hurricane attacks you and misses. A Crow attacks you. Critical hit! 121 damage. Targeting complete.
> shoot Crow You have no weapons equipped.
> equip rail You are not carrying a 125mm Railgun I
> get rail You get a 125mm Railgun I from your backpack. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 299 damage. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 312 damage A Crow attacks you and misses. You have been destroyed.
> look You are in a station. You see a clone, a clone, a bored doctor, a clone, a medical drone, and an open tank. There are exits to the n, e, and s.
|
A Soporific
Caldari Old Man Johnson's Bakery Delivery Service
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 04:42:00 -
[73]
Can I fight it? If no, then why not? *** Wisdom. Justice. Moderation. |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 05:13:00 -
[74]
I'll just echo one of the previous comments here - what if some of the black screen lag problem is due to edge cases involving latency, out-of-order packets or dropped packets?
I can imagine there might be some confusion if, say, a client was to attempt to log in to the destination system's local before it had registered itself with the sol node? -- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Moore cyno
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 06:53:00 -
[75]
I see a forthcoming massive breach of EULA by CCP using bots in an unprecedented scale :-)
|
Hun Jakuza
Roving Guns Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 06:54:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Shaalira D'arc
Originally by: Manfred Rickenbocker Awwww maaaaaaan! I wanna play EVE Text Adventure too!
> jump gate There is no "gate" here.
> warp gate Warp drive initiated. Grid loaded. You see a Hurricane, a Hurricane, an elite Gallente frigate wreck, an Ishkur, a Crow, an Amamake gate, a cargo container, a sentry gun, a sentry gun, a sentry gun, and a sentry gun.
> jump gate You cannot jump because of your Global Criminal Countdown. You are being targeted. You are being targeted. You are being targeted.
> shoot Crow You are not targeting a "Crow" A Crow attacks you and hits! 26 damage. You are being warp scrambled. You are being webbed.
> target Crow Targeting crow. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 346 damage. A Hurricane attacks you and misses. A Crow attacks you. Critical hit! 121 damage. Targeting complete.
> shoot Crow You have no weapons equipped.
> equip rail You are not carrying a 125mm Railgun I
> get rail You get a 125mm Railgun I from your backpack. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 299 damage. A Hurricane attacks you and hits! 312 damage A Crow attacks you and misses. You have been destroyed.
> look You are in a station. You see a clone, a clone, a bored doctor, a clone, a medical drone, and an open tank. There are exits to the n, e, and s.
|
Zargyl
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 08:29:00 -
[77]
Thank you CCP Atropos for this blog and all the information it contains. That ASCII pic/login does remind me of the time I used to play MUDs Anyway aside from the thin clients very nice and concrete uses of helping you debug and simulate lots of clients, have you also looked into the possibility to use it for in-game features?
Using this technology could you orchestra huge NPC fleet buildups for example? E.g. I guess most of the Sansha invasion events are done by helpers, but if those could steer quite a few of those thin-clients, couldn't that be used to simulate a fleet buildup of e.g. a Jovian or an Empire fleet? And be used for that too for events or scripted PvE content?
/me envisions an Empire fleet building up in high-sec, or a scripted Blood Raider attacks on asteroid communities "played" by those thin clients that PCs could try to foil in low-sec.
|
Louis deGuerre
Gallente Amicus Morte Shock an Awe
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 09:37:00 -
[78]
Great stuff
* has visions of macroers getting their hands on this and recoils in horror * Sol: A microwarp drive? In a battleship? Are you insane? They arenÆt built for this! Clear Skies - The Movie
|
Amida Ta
German Mining and Manufacture Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 09:47:00 -
[79]
Hmm, that screenshot sure looks like a CLI/.Net application. Didn't you say you used python? _________________________ EveAI.Live - The EVE-Online API/class library for .Net, C# and VB.Net |
Dr Magal
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 10:00:00 -
[80]
So when can we players expect to be pitted against your thin client fleet during a mass-test on Singularity?
|
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 10:14:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Zargyl Thank you CCP Atropos for this blog and all the information it contains. That ASCII pic/login does remind me of the time I used to play MUDs Anyway aside from the thin clients very nice and concrete uses of helping you debug and simulate lots of clients, have you also looked into the possibility to use it for in-game features?
Using this technology could you orchestra huge NPC fleet buildups for example? E.g. I guess most of the Sansha invasion events are done by helpers, but if those could steer quite a few of those thin-clients, couldn't that be used to simulate a fleet buildup of e.g. a Jovian or an Empire fleet? And be used for that too for events or scripted PvE content?
/me envisions an Empire fleet building up in high-sec, or a scripted Blood Raider attacks on asteroid communities "played" by those thin clients that PCs could try to foil in low-sec.
We could do, I would still prefer to do it server side, simply because you can do everything in 'god-mode' which makes things easier
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
|
CCP Atropos
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 10:14:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Amida Ta Hmm, that screenshot sure looks like a CLI/.Net application. Didn't you say you used python?
It is Python. Not all Python apps are command line based.
Software Engineer Core Engineering |
|
Miraqu
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 11:49:00 -
[83]
Even though we will not be able to play EvE from the commandline.. *sigh*
I'm happy that there are nice tools for you and you are not trying to downgrade interesting and insightful technical details to suit the reading needs of -probably- a major part of the EvE players.
In short:
<3 CCP, Keep up the good Work!
|
Tokas III
Minmatar Frost Fighters
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:25:00 -
[84]
Thank you for the dev blog. Much appreciated.
|
Altaree
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:32:00 -
[85]
This blog series is pure win. These types of communications are why I joined eve in the first place! KEEP IT UP!!! --Altaree
|
T'Amber
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 17:28:00 -
[86]
Nice blog, thanks for the details and all your effort.
-T'amber
[SoE:X]
|
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 03:53:00 -
[87]
Originally by: CCP Oveur I said unicorns died when I got technical.
This is EVE, not Hello Kitty Online. Unicorns are petfood. Let us fatten our kittens on their entrails.
Confessions of a Noob Starship Politician Spending Hours blogging the Minutes
|
RifterDrifter
Red Federation
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 07:38:00 -
[88]
Is Lag fixed yet? _______________________________________________
|
ceaon
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 09:31:00 -
[89]
i want a client that have ship icons instead of the 3 model
Originally by: CCP Adida The male thread was locked because the discussion turned into transsexuals and man boobs.
|
Catari Taga
Centre Of Attention Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:01:00 -
[90]
Originally by: CCP Oveur The evemail in API isn't nerfed to prevent competition to EVE Gate, that's ridiculous. In fact, it's a stellar example of how careful we're treading around the API.
With all due respect, that does not make a whole lot of sense. If you can deliver real time EVE mail bodies via EVE Gate with all that ridiculous bloat and browser incompatibility it involves you could as well deliver it read-only and with a cache interval via the API and have less impact on your servers than you have doing it via EVE Gate. --
|
|
Raneru
Euphoria Released
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:38:00 -
[91]
Got excited when I saw the ASCII, I thought you'd released a new linux client
|
Addicted User
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 21:37:00 -
[92]
ME WANT
|
Niccolado Starwalker
Gallente Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 14:19:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Niccolado Starwalker on 21/08/2010 14:20:27
I have to give you credits for having large brass balls for daring showing up here on the forums telling us how great this thin client is, only to tell us at the end that we cant have it! Thats nassty nassty!! But I would forgive you all, if you rewrote this code and made an android mobile phone version of the game!
Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL. |
Toshiro GreyHawk
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 08:53:00 -
[94]
Thanks for the blog. It was interesting.
I worked on a simulator for several years. We had a main program that interfaced with a number of things and the simulator provided input and accepted data as appropriate for those interfaces.
We also had a scenario generator that you could use to create massive scenarios for stress test purposes. Having programmed scenarios also helped with repeatability as it allowed you to run the exact same test each time - with no variations due to operator inconsistencies. It sounds like you're working toward something like that.
My time working on that project was all a long time ago though. Main Frames and point to point connections rather than networking.
*shrug*
Good Luck with it.
Orbiting vs. Kiting Faction Schools |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 23:53:00 -
[95]
Originally by: BLOG Q: So when can I get my hands on this? A: Never, sorry :) The client is a developer tool only
Gorram teases _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
SFX Bladerunner
Minmatar Black Serpent Technologies R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 00:21:00 -
[96]
<notification> A wild rupture appears! > lock rupture <notification> rupture locked! > activate H1-H8 <notification> rupture fled! > reload H1-H8 <notification> reloading H1-H8 done!
DO WANT. __________________________________________________
History is much like an endless waltz, the three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.. |
Karak Terrel
As Far As The eYe can see Chained Reactions
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 09:24:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Raneru Got excited when I saw the ASCII, I thought you'd released a new linux client
This
I run EVE on wine under Linux now for years and it always works perfectly. Some months ago Linux learned this: KSM. And back then my first thought was, oh that would be nice if wine could use this feature to reduce memory for multiple clients. Maybe that could be a cheap option to reduce memory consumption for this thin clients? -- please consider to visit our w-space system, cake will be served immediately. |
Ki Rathos
Minmatar Urban Mining Corp Swords Of Athena
|
Posted - 2010.08.24 15:02:00 -
[98]
Posted this in another dev blog , Still think its a good idea and probably belonged in here ===== Think it would be cool too if you guys could develop some kind of tool that allows the thin client to say run on my comp and take requests from your central server, maybe have it connect into sisi.
Would leave it on while I am working, you guys would then have a veritable army of PC's ready to put tons of automated pew pew ships onto a node. Maybe once you guys add in some diagnostic tools. A system like that would allow you to mass test whenever you needed from actual client machines, sort of the end to end way to check on things. =======
|
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2010.08.24 21:58:00 -
[99]
To be honest I would love a text version of EVE.... You're going to all the trouble making a thin client with no sound or graphics something I've positive many MANY big combat fleets would switch to when combat happens.
"OK, so we're going to be attacking x at y time, load up the thin clients it'll be a big battle"
Amarr for Life |
Scaldari Anitoba
Gallente Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 00:31:00 -
[100]
YES!!! Live Web Cam of the Server room!!!
Originally by: Cryodeus
Quote: I don't think this will ever reach the hands of players, simply because we purchased two server blades with 50GB of RAM each for large scale local testing, and if that's not enough we've got hundreds of other desktop machines within the company that we can enslave for our needs.
Do you think that in an upcoming blog you could post some non invasive photographs of where my capsuleer sleeps when i'm not playing eve?
whenever i hear you guys talk about upgrading the server the mental image i have is one or two little desktop pc towers acting as the server. i certainly know that this isn't the case.
you might not be able to post anything like that because ooo i don't want anyone to copy us or ooo i'm too scared people will steal out secret inventions of world domination.
whatever the reason, all i'm saying is is that i think it would be cool to see where our universe is contained. we see in the inside of it all the time, i kinda want a glimpse of the outside.
#########################
Fame, or Infamy. Just depends on which side writes the history. Regardless, to be remembered is to be immortal. I wish you all Immortality. |
|
Kendar
Gallente 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 08:46:00 -
[101]
now that would be a awesome mining macro
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |