|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2213
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 17:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
i would have tried to somehow solve it with voronoi maps but binary trees are probably easier to maintain since everybody knows them.
Long term Eve scalability will depend on the worst case scenario: Lots of people on one node. Or: lots of people moving between two nodes at the same time.
The first part of the dev blog basically tries to create a static load balancer which mitigates the second issue by splitting the bottle neck of a jump to two nodes (not placing neighboring systems on the same node). The first bottleneck however can only be truly solved by having real parallelism, e.g. running one system, if required, on multiple nodes. If this would be solved you wouldn't have to care about static load balancing since it could be all handled on demand. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2213
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 18:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:I am slightly confused. You started the devblog by asserting that the old system was bad, because it put clusters of connected systems on one node (and intra-node jumps are more expensive than inter-node jumps). Yet you end up with a system that puts even bigger clusters of connected systems on the same node? From the pictures it looks like instead of constellations, now huge chunks of regions share the same node. Wouldn't that lead to even more intra-node jumps?
inter node jumps appear cheaper since the load is split between two hardware components. The problem is that if they create a static load balancing like that, a fight in null might affect a entirely unrelated system, eg. in highsec.
the load balancing is better but the player perceived performance is worse. Thats why they used their old strategy again, putting neighboring systems on the same node, even though it does not parallelize jumps. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2213
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 18:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote: As others have already said, the new allocation could lead to even higher load being put on the nodes in battles, as it seems now that any sort of reinforcements or auxiliary fights will directly contribute to the load of the fleet fight node itself. And this will also happen with a pre-reinforced node - even if you take the contested system out of the picture, all the surrounding area still shares the same node. Whereas in the old distribution, it is rare to even find a system whose direct neighbors are all on the same node.
i don't know how they reinforce nodes, but they could also take a single system out of the node and put it on a stronger node. They don't have to replace the whole node with all its systems, only pick a single one. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
2213
|
Posted - 2013.12.03 19:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:Bienator II wrote:i don't know how they reinforce nodes, but they could just take a single system out of the node and put it on a stronger node. They don't have to replace the whole node with all its systems, only pick a single one. That is exactly what reinforcing a system means. it doesn't has to mean this. They could just use the loaded system and all its neighbors based on the node balancer output. It doesn't make sense for jita but it might work for some nullsec fights, or live events where thousands of people have to move 10j to be in the event system. eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
|
|
|