EVE Search - Database overload time to delete inactive accounts

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Database overload time to delete inactive accounts

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:03:00 - [31] Originally by: MysticNZ Good to hear... I really don't understand what is wrong with this idea. Warp to gate option and allowing bubbles to be placed in low sec with a larger sec hit than normal (.5). Solves all problems IMO. We've already had huge discussions about this subject and there will be no consesus reached in this thread so its a waste of the thread to argue about it even more. If all the people on a specific node or jumping to a specific node deleted their bookmarks would the node they are on be less likely to queue them? Sounds like it and if so then the people complaining about being queued could actually be causing a lot of the their own queuing. Click Me
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:31:00 - [32] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/09/2006 02:31:57 No, it dosn't "sound like it". You could have zero BM's, and if you try and jump into a node which contains a heavily loaded system then you're quewed. It has nothing to do with that YOU do. At all. Futher, that's pure speculation which is not supported by the evidence. Further, I disagree with your avowed method od reducing lag by reducing the number of players. //Maya
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:40:00 - [33] Originally by: Maya Rkell Edited by: Maya Rkell on 04/09/2006 02:31:57 No, it dosn't "sound like it". You could have zero BM's, and if you try and jump into a node which contains a heavily loaded system then you're quewed. It has nothing to do with that YOU do. At all. Futher, that's pure speculation which is not supported by the evidence. Further, I disagree with your avowed method od reducing lag by reducing the number of players. Well look at this: Originally by: Valar And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. The server queues people when the node they are on or jumping to reaches 95% or more. When a fleet is jumping into a system and suddenly gets queued, its seems possible that if they were jumping to a new node and each person had a lot of bookmarks, which is very likely for fleet op people, that that might increase the load on the server and cause the queueing. That seems a reasonable assumption based on what Valar was saying above. But I am sure you'll majick some irrelevancies and random speculative facts to entirely 110% discount my theory. Click Me
Maya Rkell Forsaken Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 02:51:00 - [34] All speculative. Entirely speculative. They're not nerfing it, they're nerfing BM copying, indicating that THAT is the real source of the issue not the handoff. And right, you have to take a bash because you feel insecure, right. All done? yawns //Maya
LE suck	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:02:00 - [35] No maya, it's because you're an obnoxious little ** who thinks they know it all. You remind me of comic book guy with your arrogant holier-than-thou, *** lodged up ass manner of speaking. You're the reason people pray to jesus for an ignore button on the forums.
Vaslav Tchitcherine Swag Co.	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:16:00 - [36] CCP NERF MAYA KTHX. Or something. Relax. Life without dissent would be pretty boring. v. swag
Reiisha Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:19:00 - [37] Originally by: Maya Rkell All speculative. Entirely speculative. They're not nerfing it, they're nerfing BM copying, indicating that THAT is the real source of the issue not the handoff. And right, you have to take a bash because you feel insecure, right. All done? yawns You realize that you are speculating on this too, right? Jeez.
ThunderGodThor KIA Corp	Posted - 2006.09.04 03:25:00 - [38] Valar would the solotion of making BMs client side rather then sever side reduce the load on the servers and would it take care of the lag and extra load that happens when you change nodes?
hendo001 Caldari Quantum Tech Mining	Posted - 2006.09.04 04:42:00 - [39] If bookmarks are to be nerf'd or replaced somehow, the improvemnts would help and be welcomed right? so if the commuity had a reasonable solution to the bookmark/insta problem, would it not be feesable to hold a general disscussion or some type of vote? I;m sure that if the developers could present us the community with a list of options, then let the players choose by means of a vote on a system to replace the instas/bookmarks this would be ok? Just a thought... Visit the QTM forums Linkage Also visit my blog Linkage
fuze Gallente Chosen Path Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.09.04 05:16:00 - [40] Just wondered with recent BM copying frenzy how hard the BM table grew the last weeks. With people having sets over 10k range you'd end up with several hundreds of millions records and that should make DBA wary. With BM tables being 14% in size I just wonder how much CPU those queries take up during peaks and avg load. What size of the cache it takes up etc. And those statistics might even be interesting for microsoft since these larger real-time databases are rather scarce.
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:17:00 - [41] Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. There are people with 50k bookmarks? WTF? I've been playing for over 2.5 years and my main probably only has around a thousand or so. -- (Battle hardened miner) [Brackley, UK] WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality.
Zodiaq Gallente	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:24:00 - [42] And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... is there any? Zodiaq
Estelle Matsuko Caldari The Beiatch Corp Inc	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:42:00 - [43] Edited by: Estelle Matsuko on 04/09/2006 08:43:40 Originally by: Zodiaq Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:29:11 Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:27:01 And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Rather than keeping BMs in DB everyone would have special dir in game dir with BMs... Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... -BMs->files -vouchers->new books with BMs list (to keep all selected BMs in one place, not in xxxx vouchers) So what's the big deal? Just do it! because if bm¦s are "player side" no matter how they are encrypted, they WILL be hacked and exploited. Delete all current BM¦s. Give everyone the ability to make thier own bm¦s but NOT the ability to copy them. If you want em, make your own. 14% is a freaking large percentage of the DB
Infinity Ziona Feet Corporation	Posted - 2006.09.04 08:42:00 - [44] Originally by: Zodiaq Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:29:11 Edited by: Zodiaq on 04/09/2006 08:27:01 And whats the big problem to make BMs as files?? Rather than keeping BMs in DB everyone would have special dir in game dir with BMs... Mechanics would stay exactly the same, but ALL LOAD will be moved from DB to clients... and we could at last easly share them with friends!! I don't see any problem here... -BMs->files -vouchers->new books with BMs list (to keep all selected BMs in one place, not in xxxx vouchers) So what's the big deal? Just do it! I believe tis that pesky Qaulity Control thing and considering all the ramifications of the change. Click Me
Juwi Kotch Gallente VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:06:00 - [45] Two possibilities: Valar has got the task to slowly prepare the playerbase that bookmarks will be deleted/altered/limited. Valar is frustrated with the indecisiveness or slow proceedings of the game designers to solve the bookmark problem and vents off here. Giving the date, time and tone of his postings, I'm tempted to bet on the second possibility. By the way: I'm around for more then a year, and have 0 bookmarks, besides the automatic mission ones, and the occational can to loot or system to approach for a trading task. My corporation has complete bookmark sets for all regions, though, and quite some members are just copying as many bookmarks as they can, before the copying limit kicks in. Juwi Kotch
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:41:00 - [46] Valar for president,hey man you could press the red button and by doing so deleting all BM and prevent them from being copied ,i would marry you(and i'am male )
Sharcy Sonnema	Posted - 2006.09.04 09:56:00 - [47] Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? --

Chribba Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire	Posted - 2006.09.04 10:45:00 - [48] Originally by: Sharcy Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? Just make sure Valar includes the following statement when dropping the bookmarks and I'm all for removing BM's update eveNames set itemName = Replace(itemName, 'Amarr VIII (Oris)', 'Amarr VIII (Chribba)') where itemName like 'Amarr VIII (Oris)%' EVE-Files \| EVE-Search \| Monitor this Thread

Lazuran	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:00:00 - [49] Originally by: smeggy Ive always wondered about this little thing that the devs said about 2 years ago. We will not delete any player account that is inactive in the foreseeable future unless it becomes absolutely necessary. Well I know many accounts that have been inactive for over 2 years and a few for more than 3 years. Would CCP consider deleting some of these accounts and freeing up some valuable database space. Your view is far too simplistic. Databases always have parts that are more frequently used than others and the total size is rarely an issue (storage is cheap), it's only the total size of the frequently accessed data that can pose a problem. CCP has mentioned that they have their transaction logs on a RamSan, which ran out of space a couple of times. This is the problem, not the inactive accounts (which are actually good, since the only reason some people came back to EVE is that they could use their frozen accounts/characters again after many months). It is also important to realize that these performance issues are TECHNICAL problems and they should have TECHNICAL solutions and not be compensated by a modified gameplay like many people have proposed. The bookmark nerf was bad and it was nothing less than CCP giving up on trying to solve the technical problems with BMs. It makes me worry about what's next. Will they "solve" the gang overview bugs by limiting the number of people in a gang to a maximum of 10? "The whole of NYC is not 1.0. Some back alley in the Bronx is deep 0.0, while right outside NYPD headquarters is 1.0." -- Slaaght Bana
Sable Schroedinger Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:01:00 - [50] Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. So the performance increase would not only be on the database size but will also impact performance on the EVE servers themselfes quite alot. I'm too tired to post properly, going to bed now. Good night everyone. Major Gormur or Foggy will be watching the server tonight. Just a though, I know this one is untidy and breaks a few design rules, but this could be a temp fix should design team take their time (over a year or so). BMs are geographically based, you only get to use the ones that you are in the right system for, so one could conclude you only need the ones in your current region. Therefore, at the extreme, breaking existing BMs table down into regonal tables and only loading to a player the ones for their current system would lower the search overhead and the amount that are transfered between nodes. If the breaking down to separate tables offends your sensibilities too much (it kinda sticks with me), simply filtering down to current region would most likely help. Yes this would only help for so long, but my buy time for something better - like removing insta's! -------------------------------------------- Nothing is as cruel as the righteousness of innocents
Tachy	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:04:00 - [51] Originally by: Sable Schroedinger Originally by: Valar [...] Just a though, I know this one is untidy and breaks a few design rules, but this could be a temp fix should design team take their time (over a year or so). BMs are geographically based, you only get to use the ones that you are in the right system for, so one could conclude you only need the ones in your current region. Therefore, at the extreme, breaking existing BMs table down into regonal tables and only loading to a player the ones for their current system would lower the search overhead and the amount that are transfered between nodes. If the breaking down to separate tables offends your sensibilities too much (it kinda sticks with me), simply filtering down to current region would most likely help. Yes this would only help for so long, but my buy time for something better - like removing insta's! I use BM to set the course for my AP ... --==*-- Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment.
Ilmonstre Minmatar 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:07:00 - [52] Edited by: Ilmonstre on 04/09/2006 11:07:38 Originally by: Andrue Originally by: Valar Well, deleting the bookmarks from the database certainly would lighten the load on it, especially around startup when so many people are logging in while their systems are loading. And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. There are people with 50k bookmarks? WTF? I've been playing for over 2.5 years and my main probably only has around a thousand or so. well andrue is you are a nomad like me you kinda have more like me. i have almost all regions am like only missing 2 or so. i find them sp usefull but i will be happy when they change/fix it or however you wanna call it as that will help alot iin the gameplay and most likely the database problems edit: ooh and hell no to deleating them i have had 3 people i know in rl that came back becouse they could use their old char still so its a very usefull thing as i am sure they are not the only ones that did that.
Miss Overlord Gallente Garoun Investment Bank	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:08:00 - [53] maybe 10 instead of 5 as the limit otherwise it looks good
Sable Schroedinger Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:15:00 - [54] and if it was 10, then 20 would be wanted. If theres a limit, someone always wants more. -------------------------------------------- Nothing is as cruel as the righteousness of innocents
Tachy	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:16:00 - [55] How much extra DB- and Serverload did the careless announcement of the BM-Copy-Limit produce over the weekend? Do you mind giving some numbers? --==*-- Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment.
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2006.09.04 11:59:00 - [56] YASSTBMI (Yet Another Simple Solution to BookMark Issue): - Warp to 5km - Make that STOP button will cancel your current jump, thus no need for safespots. - Reduce amount of "space storage SS's" to 256 per character. Done! Unnerf Amarr! "Just because you can utterly ruin another player's game doesn't mean that you must."
Pesadel0 Vagabundos	Posted - 2006.09.04 12:21:00 - [57] Originally by: Chribba Originally by: Sharcy Edited by: Sharcy on 04/09/2006 09:56:23 Originally by: Valar Yes, deleting the bookmarks table will make me very happy. While we're waiting for a permanent fix, in the mean time, you could "accidentally" type this: DROP TABLE bookmarks; [ENTER] Don't tell anyone you got it from me, 'kay? Just make sure Valar includes the following statement when dropping the bookmarks and I'm all for removing BM's update eveNames set itemName = Replace(itemName, 'Amarr VIII (Oris)', 'Amarr VIII (Chribba)') where itemName like 'Amarr VIII (Oris)%' Can i be the first to say can i have your stuff?
Jenson Cole Red Dagger Fleet	Posted - 2006.09.04 12:27:00 - [58] While I belive that bookmarks need to be fixed in a way that it's a perminent fix I'm still undecided so here are my ideas. 1. Limit Bookmarks to no more than 100-150 per person. Along with the copy rule that will be added tuesday. 2. Create the skill that was rumored to be in the making months ago concerning warping. For every level trainned a number is added to a base formula to determine how close you arrive at a Stargate or Station (Warp points for missions work as they always have). With this you eliminate bookmarks to a large degree and with this add in the idea mentioned earlier that if a pilot wishes to pull there ship out of warp early allow them to using the Stop feature and only then set up a potential safe spot. (Limit the character to the 100-150 bookmark rule) If CCP went with this skill make it a rather cheap skill along the lines of a level 2 or 3 skill with a basic requisite of Navigation 2 or 3 prior to being able to train the skill. Either way they go SOMETHING will have to be done. If Bookmarks are a large enough issue that they have to post a warning concerning it some form of action will be required otherwise ALOT of new players are going to be really turned off about this game if it has consistant lag due to a massive database having issues.
Eron Lygera Gallente Sharded Awareness	Posted - 2006.09.04 13:26:00 - [59] Originally by: Valar Originally by: PKlavins Originally by: Valar Deleting the bookmarks table, not counting the vouchers and items that are created when bookmarks are made into items, we would save around 14% of the current database size. would that improve performance by any noticable amount? And over all it would give a performance increase because the server would not have to hand the bookmarks between nodes when a person with 50k bookmarks jumps or dock or decides to open his bookmark list. How many people has 50k bookmarks? Just curious.. With love Eron Ps. Dont nerf WCS!
Wilfan Ret'nub Singularity.	Posted - 2006.09.04 13:50:00 - [60] Originally by: Valar But they sure as hell know what I, the development DBA, PapaSmurf the network programmer and Fuhry the lead programmer think about bookmarks. Have you thought about "compacting" the bookmarks? Like if 2 BMs point to same location in same system (and are in places, not as an item in cargo hold/hangar), they get the same ItemID and thus only one line in the BM table? Or is it how it already works? ------ No ISK, no fun

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

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