I would like to use the opportunity to toss in my $.02 regarding
time dilation in scripts.

Time dilation as a LL function is defined to return a value between
0 and 1, which, while not as informative as the new dilation stat,
is useful to make scripts perform better under bad simulator conditions.

I would postulate that the only case in which any script in OpenSim
uses this function is if it was copy/pasted from SL. Since the
return value is a constant 1, I doubt any software written for
OpenSim specifically even uses it.

A SL compatible return value would improve the copy/pasted scripts
from SL and not adversely affect OpenSim scripts which don't use it
anyway.

I would therefore like to propose to change the return value of the
LL function to return an SL-compatible value and, should there be
interest, maybe introduce a companion OS function returning the raw
value, including the positive values greater 1.

- Melanie

On 26/04/2015 13:28, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) wrote:
> Good Morning All,  in previous email I described the simulator statistics 
> reporting adjustments we have been working on.  This group requested that we 
> avoid sending a major code drop, so we have staggered the code updates into 
> three different stats patches.  You could call the first patch a dry run of 
> sorts to allow us to ensure proper formatting and integration on your side.  
> Looks like all we need to do is sort out the white spaces issue in the patch 
> and we will be good to go.
> 
> 
> 
> For your planning purposes, here is the roadmap for all three stats patches:
> 
> 
> 
> Patch 1: Simulator FPS, Physics FPS, Total Frame Time, Physics Frame Time, 
> and Simulation Time.
> 
> Patch 2: correct the broken user login freezes, XEngine Thread Count, Util 
> Thread Count, System Thread Count, Proc Mem, Frame Dilation (previous the 
> proposed Time Dilation).
> 
> Patch 3: network reporting:  UDPIn, UDPOut, UDPInError, PktsIn, PktsOut, 
> Avatar to IP list, Server-to-Client Ping, and Average Server Ping (External).
> 
> 
> 
> The attached screenshot shows Patch 1 in action on the MOSES grid.  Based on 
> your feedback, we did not affect how the script engine reports Time Dilation, 
> however the simulator frame rate is reported accurately.  This is 
> demonstrated via a scripted object (green box).  The statistics window 
> reports Time Dilation accurately and is a constantly changing value based on 
> simulator load, specifically physics interactions.  (Forgive the low client 
> frame rate, I took the screenshot on an older laptop.)  Some of you have seen 
> this screenshot, I'm providing it again for context.
> 
> 
> 
> What's next?  Physics & Networking.  Just tossing physical balls into a pit 
> or logging in a few dozen bots isn't an adequate test.  There are too many 
> variables at play and even simulator<->physics engine integration code is 
> wickedly complex.  We need to be able to rely on the reporting of the 
> simulator's behavior so we can know what adjustments are meaningful.  We 
> don't yet know if PhysX is better than Bullet, but thorough and accurate 
> testing is the only way to find out.
> 
> 
> 
> What's the potential payoff for you?  Imagine being able to hold an event 
> like the OSCC in a single large var region.  Imagine having lots of people 
> being able to log into a region simultaneously, rather than in serial like 
> today.  Wouldn't it be nice to be able to actually plan for what hardware and 
> network support you need for a grid, rather than just guessing and buying the 
> best you can afford - not what you actually need?
> 
> 
> 
> This is what we are working towards.  If we can agree that these changes are 
> valid and necessary, then I invite you to inspect our work.  If you object to 
> the way we have implemented the changes, then we welcome feedback and will 
> work with you to find a more compatible path.
> 
> 
> 
> In approximately 9 months, we will begin testing some new simulation based 
> training material that involves large numbers of people and I would like to 
> have a version of MOSES ready in time to support.  My only alternative is to 
> continue licensing a very expensive proprietary engine.  It is my desire to 
> cancel that license and devote those funds to open simulator development, but 
> only if the MOSES can handle the work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
> Science and Technology Manager
> Virtual World Strategic Applications
> U.S. Army Research Lab
> Human Research & Engineering Directorate
> Simulation & Training Technology Center
> (c) (407) 242-0209<tel:%28407%29%20242-0209>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

Reply via email to