| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Tachy
   |
Posted - 2006.12.21 07:00:00 -
[1]
BPO and BPC are the same item in the database.
I would not be surprised when a BPC is just an entry linking to the BPO with a number of runs attached. And the BPO you research exists as a separate item in the DB - The old gets removed from your hangar and the researched one being placed in there. This would explain a couple of the problems that appear from time to time where BP kinda disappear from the research or production facilities during patches.
There's no way to technically differentiate between them without accessing the full BP entry each time someone opens a container (hangar, can, ship ...) for each single BP in there - and in all containers within.
You do remember the reason for removing those insta bookmarks at stations and gates? Yes, it has been done to remove the load on the database.
Do you remember the reason for the revamp of the production and science system?
Yes, ir has been done to remove the load on the database.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.21 08:42:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Fire Hawk
The current database schema simply doesnt allow to do it.
They need to change something in the DB that will need to fix a massive code correction everywhere in the game.
However they can do it on the client side I think, but will generate a loading delay in the hangars where BP's appear. Imagine 150 BP's in a corp hangar that each need a server request before rendering the icon.
Currently the item info itself isn't pulled. The client just gets the information that a BP of <item> is there. If the client or the server had to access the data each time and for every single BP in the ships, hangars and cans, we would not like the resulting DB based lag.
Currently the BP item entry is only accessed when you look at the BP or when you're trying to install it into a lab or factory.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.21 10:47:00 -
[3]
They don't just look the same.
They are the same.
A change would require a complete rework of the Science&Industry and the production system, all laong the POS and relevant remote skills & features.
On the bright side it would mean that the reduction in the DB complexity from removing all basic and micro BP would be counted by a long shot.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.21 17:31:00 -
[4]
They do not access the entry for the BPs unless you apply a 'show info' or install it into a lab or factory.
Until then the BP is just a generic BP of the type.
I think Valar posted about that about 1.5 years ago. I might be off on the Dev and the time here by a long shot.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.21 18:10:00 -
[5]
Drop the BP into your corp hangar.
Have the CEO or director start a vote.
Have someone remove the unlocked BPC from your corp.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.23 07:53:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ghoest
Edited by: Ghoest on 23/12/2006 03:42:36
Originally by: kieron
Originally by: Lucio[...
[...]
No offense but some one lied to you.
With respect to auctions(where this matters most) it could be done.
Kieron is the impersonification of the travelling salesman and customer complaint guy for ccp.
He'll tell you what you want he thinks you want to hear and he doesn't really like it when you tell him that you know that. He's a nice guy.
Oveur does the same at another level. He's a nice guy too.
Back to the topic:
For client and server, a BP is a BP.
There used to be only BP early in EVE.
Copies came in later so pilots and corps could move around without having to fear the loss of the most valuable things in their possession.
The devs did not redesign the production and later the science system. They just added some snippets here and there. That's the reason why the client and the server don't know if some BP is a copy or an original. They can't know until you explicitely ask the system to undig that the info.
They can't know in advance without a complete redesign for the production and science system takes place.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.30 11:55:00 -
[7]
Originally by: traveller
[...] only gets the itemID, the typeID and the quantity. [...]
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.12.30 17:52:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Koti Resci
Originally by: Tachy
Originally by: traveller
[...] only gets the itemID, the typeID and the quantity.[...]
It would not be hard to modify the "quantity" field similar to how someone wanted to modify the ID field, except that now we don't have the whole trouble of having to support 2 IDs for the same blueprint. The only trouble we'd have is if someone has the upper limit of the quantity field, but then again, if we can stack up more than 4.3 billion tritanium, I doubt anyone would have more than 4.3 billion instances of a blueprint (whether a copy or an origional).
Those two IDs and the quantity are used for each and every stack in your hangar. BP do not get an extra treatment. Huge amounts of minerals aren't as rare as you seem to think, and my stack of original trit changing magically into a copy of trit is beyond my understanding.
Each time I have seen an implementation based on 'probably nobody ever' resulted in things like DB breakdown, hard to track client crashes and data loss.
--*=*=*--
The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing.
by Sharkbait | 2006.09.20 |
| |
|