On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Teravus Ovares <[email protected]> wrote:
> Regarding this... why are we not co-opting a different, currently > unused, sim stats for the OpenSimulator 'Real performance' counter? There > are many unused simstats. If we keep the fudge factor on the main one, > the viewer lag meter are happy, and we put the real value in a different > sim-stat, the performance analysis can take place accurately. > >> >> Teravus.. The whole point of starting this conversation was that WE HAD THESE CONVERSATIONS.. We had a community forum discussion on how to implement reporting of the correct statistics. The Moses group found a comment buried in the source code and asked about WHY someone decided to multiply the Physics frame rate ( which is LOCKED at 11 FPS ) by a factor of 5... No one on core could really explain it until Justin suggested reaching out to you.. That grew into a discussion of whether it made any sense to continue to report "politically correct" numbers or the actual Physics frame rate. The overwhelming majority of the people who responded indicted that it didn't make ANY sense to continue reporting the bad stats. The answers we got from the core team was that it might break performance monitoring scripts or have an effect on some internal calculations... There was an extended period of discussion to allow folks to make suggestions or comment on the things that would break It took almost 3 months from the beginning of the discussion to the time it was applied. There was NO guidance from core that it was in any way important to maintain the functionality of an obscure feature in some un-maintained viewer code. The objection I raised to begin this debacle was that it seemed like a member of core had just randomly decided that after 3 months of asking folks to jump through hoops, and then 6 months of having the sky NOT fall, it was ok to make a unilateral decision to revert the patch ( or override it with some new hidden config variable that would only continue the confusion about what the actual Physics FPS rate was). After all is said and done...It still seems to me like that is the situation... I have given up trying to get any real discussion about who it was that demanded that we revert the patch so their NON ACCURATE lag meter blinks green instead of red. We have heard form other grid owners, we have heard from viewer devs, we have heard from academics whose reputations may have been tarnished by publishing incorrect data. Bottom Line... One core member has decided that it is ok to ignore the efforts of this forums community and introduced a solution that lets the same code base report 55 OR 11 for the exact same statistic in the exact same code base, Its also been decided that it is STILL correct to add yet another level of complexity and possible source of confusion to the situation by renaming our Fudge factor/lie the NORMALIZED number. I can't code like members of core, I can't seem to influence the decisions they are determined to make with regards to this insanity.. This is not a technically complicated issue... it is simply a matter of making a decision about what is correct. Apparently " correct " is related to the Euros that some unknown benefactor is willing to put up to make the lights blink green. WE ( nearly 95% of everyone who participated in the original period of discussion) had agreed that reporting the correct number was the right thing to do MOSES spent manpower and money to go through the process of getting a patch submitted/corrected, and applied, It WAS NOT a problem for anyone except for some unknown users on some unnamed grid ( who have YET to speak for themselves ). My objection remains... It is NOT proper to be able to bypass the community decision making nature WE assumed was the proper mechanism to resolve such issues. We have had close to 150 posts on this topic in the past 2 weeks and NO ONE has been able to explain why it is the correct decision to revert the patch AND ignore the requests and almost unanimous agreement that the way things have been for 6 months was the best technical and political decision. I am committed to making OpenSim work.. I am sure there are folks who have seen this debacle unfold who are now less committed or interested in trying to participate with a technical group that believes it is politically "correct" to set such a precedent ( ignoring community forum input in favor of backroom "deals")... How can there possibly be a level of confidence in the platform/community if it takes 9 months to come to an agreement that a Physics Frame Rate that is LOCKED at 11FPS should not be reported at 11 FPS??? Its not a complicated situation, It isn't a hard question... But it has turned into a real eye opener on the inside workings of this project for me (and from the comments I've received offline, for a large number of others). The lag meter didn't work before the numbers changed. At best it was a random guess that was likely at least 10% off. The original code would cast the floating point FPS number to an int before multiplying by some random factor of 5 to make sure that jitter didnt skew it wildly... It STILL doesn't work. Even the viewer devs who participated and went through the trouble to correct for the 11FPS number told us, the % levels at which the lights are green, yellow , or red are different for OpenSim and "that other grid". Melanies' solution means that now they have to rework their code to use her new magical mechanism to transmit the number 5 from Opensim to the viewer so it can do the multiplication...It also means that grid operators have to be able to explain why the same stat on different grids can be just as correct when it says 11 as when it says 55. That's not my problem, but I feel sorry for the honest grid operators who choose to tell the truth, and face charges that their grid is 5x slower than some other grid where the admin doesn't even know enough to change the new INI config value. Do I sound frustrated yet? Please don't ask that question NOW.. The bridges are burned.
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
