| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Dr Slaughter
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
   |
Posted - 2006.07.23 20:25:00 -
[151]
Edited by: Dr Slaughter on 23/07/2006 20:25:38
 omg I actually forgot why I stopped reading eve-o. This thread just reminded me. 
mssql and ccp's architecture seem perfectly fit for purpose to me. They just need to brush up on some of the house keeping. Which Valar said they're planning on doing.
What I would really like to see is a joint CCP / MCS {microsoft consulting services for those who don't know} white paper detailing the deployment. At least, those interested, would then actually have some hard facts to talk about. Perhaps some of the posters in this thread could then take the arguments onto slashdot  instead.
-- select * FROM posts (nolock) where clue > 0 --
0 rows returned
|
canned
|
Posted - 2006.07.24 00:38:00 -
[152]
So when are people gonna get their stuff back that they bought off of market but never received the item in their hangar??
im missing a vagabond and muninn i bought and ive petitioned and still had no response
|
Grover Uzumaki
|
Posted - 2006.07.24 00:53:00 -
[153]
 Originally by: Maximillian Pele
I think we need to all send CCP some server Viagra - as they keep having performance issues and can't keep it up.
And for god's sake let's get rid of the tens of thousands of secured cans anchored in every conceivable location. It is obvious that many are not being used. When you warp into a remote asteroid belt with roids the size of planets, it is obvious that the 100+ cans surrounding it aren't being used.
Simply state that a can that is not used for x number of days breaks its anchor and is lost. Might free up space on the data base.
But then we lose out on corp logos such as
|
SengH
Black Omega Security
E.R.A
|
Posted - 2006.07.24 12:53:00 -
[154]
After seeing valar on EVE TV... I think we know the REAL reason why the server went down.
|
Lorelei Lee
|
Posted - 2006.07.24 13:32:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Valar
The server problems were because we ran out of free itemIDs. I'm not going to explain how our itemID system works, I've done so in the past, but for technical reasons and performance reasons the itemID column is of datatype int, not bigint, so the table is limited to max int number of items at any given time.
So let me get this straight: you can keep track of max 4,294,967,296 items at a time, on a system with over 120,000 user accounts (and growing). That means if each user keeps 35,792 items in their hangars all over the galaxy, the server will implode.
Did I miss anything? Otherwise: how long till asset rationing? Tell me now so I can get an eraly start on liquidating my collection of every standard and named T1 item in the game.
|
Imhotep Khem
Vortex.
|
Posted - 2006.07.24 17:17:00 -
[156]
I doubt they need to keep track of every item continuously. Just the ones you recently accessed directly.
Those that were here will remember all the hoopla when the new database servers arrived. I think IBM manages more than just the hardware.
In any event, I do not recall the database failing yet. And this again is not a database failure just as I suggested in my post earlier. Its a CCP failure to manage their database. Perhaps items need to auto-empty from the junkyard when the level of items gets critical. Yea that is obvious and Im sure it will be done when CCP gets the time to implement it. Or while its not implemented I would have extected an error message detailing exactly the problem. How can you not do this for a manual situation? For now this reflects bad on CCP. Not necessarily bad on Eve.
I did not say Python was a bad choice. I said maybe Python was a bad choice. Thats for CCP to decide. Whats clear is CCP has a bad product development process. And I believe a loose language like Pyton needs a stronger process.
I first recognized this when I saw how the actual stats listed for a piece of equipment is just text and has nothing to do with what the game uses for calculations. They can never keep these two in synch. That was an insane design decision.
If CCP were public they would take routine beatings.
____
"If your not dyin' your not tryin'."
"Are you prepared to go all the way, Alexi?" DuGalle |
Hammering Hank
|
Posted - 2006.07.25 05:00:00 -
[157]
I am still rather new to EVE, and to MMO's for that matter. However, I do come from a development and system administration background. I do not know the reasons CCP decided to develop EVE on a MS Windows based system, but I trust they had some good ones.
I do know from developing on and administering both UNIX and Windows servers some of the problems and benefits of each. Basically, the Windows development environment especially in the graphics area is easier and has more potential than basic UNIX. Windows also has many other development tools readily available, not to mention the massive install base and numerous developers. However, I know from a mission critical aspect, you do not trust MS Windows. For any mission critical systems, UNIX is the preferred choice. Updates are able to be made to applications and other OS systems without taking down the entire system. Process control is much stronger. User administration is much more rich. And garbage collection in the form of memory leaks and variable overruns are able to be dealt with via the OS through the use of scripts.
A fact from my system admin days is that we would have to reboot the Windows servers at least once a week. We usually put a process on the system to reboot in the middle of the night when no-one was at the office. I see CCP is doing this as well. Luckily for me it is at the time I am in bed. 
(T)Hank(s)
|
Grismar
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.25 06:44:00 -
[158]
Although Valar already mentioned there being some obscure technical reason for picking int instead of bigint for item ids, it leaves me wondering if someone at CCP pulled a Bill Gates in the early stages of EVE. ("640kb ought to be enough for anyone", remember?)
In some earlier thread, Valar explained that
Quote:
We can't change the itemID column to bigint because that would increase the size of the items table at least 3 times and all its indexes by at least two and we can't use negative numbers because of how the inventory system is implemented.
It would seem that CCP has put the negative numbers to some "alternative" use then, since it would ofcourse be a piece of cake to turn the bigint into an unsigned bigint. Still, that would only mean doubling the size of the itemid space and that's going to run out fast too.
Adding some sort of custom binary type would allow for specific tuning of the table sizes, but kills all functionality the server has on integers. No solution there.
So, the bottomline is we need to spend more dollars and euro's on EVE, so CCP can afford more high speed storage and can just flip the int itemid to a bigint and be done with it.
Greetings.
Your EVE IGB home: EVE Wiki, Explorer, Navigator |
Bruce Leeroy
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.25 18:56:00 -
[159]
I'm rather shocked at this big a snafu.
Has ringings of Y2K all over again.
==========================
Join Orion Ore ... for the good life.
|
Cocyte
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 20:19:00 -
[160]
Originally by: The Slayer
WTB bookmark to junkyard location.
Check in Deltole :p
All your booze are belong to me.
|
Shiraz Merlot
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.07.28 06:34:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Traxman
Most of the new people that does it dont have a clue, i canagree on that, but you think that works on people that have been working with Debian for 10 years and have it as professional ?
For me you just became a Clown, a big one...
Regarding that running eve's db on mysql, is that something you have tried - or its just rabble ?
Okay, since you asked. I run - actually my operations team do the running, I'm the system architect now - over 200 Debian servers, with complex applications, serving seven-figure userbases, with over 12TB of storage of varying kinds, including mysql and Oracle databases. Hope that establishes my credentials for you.
And with all that experience, no - I don't think mysql would be up to the task. It's a toy database, and Linux is Unix lite. It's a good fit for certain applications, including mine. Tbh I think Eve could run on Linux - after all, it's basically a big Python app - but mysql? No.
If I was going to pick out the ideal database for Eve, I would direct you to Objectivity/DB.
/sm
|
Jordan Plath
|
Posted - 2006.07.29 23:00:00 -
[162]
I've got the same question after filing a petition a week ago. Is it going to take much longer for all requests stemming from this particular problem to be looked at ?
JP
Originally by: canned
So when are people gonna get their stuff back that they bought off of market but never received the item in their hangar??
im missing a vagabond and muninn i bought and ive petitioned and still had no response
|
schwar2ss
|
Posted - 2006.08.03 18:47:00 -
[163]
hi there,
i'm just curious: are u still processing petitions from that crash? if so, how many petitions are still left?
thx in advance for that info
|
Dr Slaughter
ISS Navy Task Force
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.12 11:56:00 -
[164]
Originally by: Grismar
Although Valar already mentioned there being some obscure technical reason for picking int instead of bigint for item ids, it leaves me wondering if someone at CCP pulled a Bill Gates in the early stages of EVE. ("640kb ought to be enough for anyone", remember?)
In some earlier thread, Valar explained that
Quote:
We can't change the itemID column to bigint because that would increase the size of the items table at least 3 times and all its indexes by at least two and we can't use negative numbers because of how the inventory system is implemented.
It would seem that CCP has put the negative numbers to some "alternative" use then, since it would ofcourse be a piece of cake to turn the bigint into an unsigned bigint. Still, that would only mean doubling the size of the itemid space and that's going to run out fast too.
Adding some sort of custom binary type would allow for specific tuning of the table sizes, but kills all functionality the server has on integers. No solution there.
So, the bottomline is we need to spend more dollars and euro's on EVE, so CCP can afford more high speed storage and can just flip the int itemid to a bigint and be done with it.
Greetings.
They must be looking at how they're going to solve this on the China cluster. I can't help but think they're going to have to do a major re-write of various bits of the architecture to accomodate the issues of scale they're going to run into. $'s for hardware are only going to take it so far. Hopefully a re-write will make it prior to item rationing for us! 
-- select * FROM posts (nolock) where clue > 0 --
0 rows returned
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |