You should be aware that scenery building is much more of a data shuffling job, and much less of a cpu intensive job. The big bottlenecks will be your network bandwidth and server disk IO.


Arnt Karlsen wrote:

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:20:13 -0500, Curtis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Arnt Karlsen wrote:

..Curt, I need an idea of how much cpu work, building the scenery,
is.  What kinda machine(s) did you use, and how long did  it take to
build the scenery?

I haven't timed the latest builds real close, but figure if you throw
a couple machines at it in parallel, it's going to take you at least

..these are 2 recent machines? Specs?

a full 7 days (x 24 hours) to do the final assembly and crunching. This doesn't include any of the data prep work (which could take
weeks if you start from scratch), nor does it include the airport
model generation which takes a day or so.

..can do ;o), assuming you used 2 Celeron 850's, that makes it 2 hours.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ $ qalc 2*8*24*1700/320000
(1700 * 24 * 8 * 2) / 320000 = 2.04
1700 is a NTWAG BigoMips figure for a Celeron, 320,000 is for the cluster estimate, I will have to use some machines as switches too. build 12.6GB of scenery, I assume I simply do a rebuild of our last
version, se we _can_ shoot for a 25GB target size, if we want it any bigger. Here I WAG the same cpu work per Gig of scenery, which probably is dead wrong. ;o)

And of course this doesn't count any of the time you need to spend
sitting down and sorting through tile build problems (or other
bugs/missing features) that you haven't gotten around to looking at

..very true, and for a 4 hour stunt run, there will be _no_ such bug fix
time, it will all have to be scripted, end to end. Watching my gasifier
rig remains my top priority, a good 1/3 of my gas is CO, so I dont want
_any_ leaks.



Curtis Olson
HumanFIRST Program
FlightGear Project
Unique text:        2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to