Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

I've gotten a lot of DM's on the subject of testing & evaluation.  We 
appreciate your interest in the work.

The MOSES project set up a public redmine site a while back for you to monitor 
our progress and download latest code.  You can find the wiki here:
https://redmine.militarymetaverse.org/projects/opensim-physx/wiki

and the files area here:
https://redmine.militarymetaverse.org/projects/opensim-physx/files

The latest stable version is 1.05, but the brave can jump into the beta 1.1.  
We also release our test scenarios as OAR files and the software design spec.

Please keep in mind that the chaotic nature of the OpenSimulator development 
process has prevented us from maintaining lock-step compatibility with the 
latest OpenSim code base.  Please review documentation and work from our GitHub 
OpenSim code base for your testing.  Should someone wish to volunteer to 
integrate or maintain a version of our PhysX module that is compatible with the 
latest OpenSim code, we would welcome the collaboration.

MOSES GitHub:  https://github.com/M-O-S-E-S

v/r -doug

Douglas Maxwell, Ph.D.
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Saunders
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 8:08 PM
To: opensim-dev
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [Non-DoD Source] Re: PhysX vs. BulletSim vs. ODE

All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the 
identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links contained 
within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a Web browser.


________________________________



I am very interested in testing out the physics system.  But the big question 
is, is there any requirements past the basic opensim requirements to have it 
working on another grid?

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Zadark Portal <[email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] > > wrote:


        Hello Douglas
        Interesting progress report. Is there any timeline available for if or 
when others can configure and profile the system?
        Zadark

        On 5 February 2016 at 18:00, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL 
(US) <[email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] > > wrote:


                Thank you for your feedback, Michael.  As you know, the 
OpenSimulator is a very complex system.  It is very important for us to isolate 
as many variables as possible to present a responsible comparison analysis of 
the three engines.  Sean presented the performance of the engines with the 
OpenSim configured as "stock".



                You are absolutely correct, using the 
"UseSeparatePhysicsThread" flag does improve performance.  It is just one of 
the variables we are examining to determine the affect of the physics engine on 
the overall system.  Sean was reporting that there were significant increases 
in performance during the baseline testing.  By carefully and systematically 
changing the variables in the system, we can determine which variables have the 
most impact differentiation from the baseline as well as what affect each 
variable has on each engine.



                I realize this looks like tedious work, and it is.  However 
this approach allows us to profile and examine the code so that meaningful 
changes can be made for the better (not accidentally stumbling upon a 
combination of variables).    As an Enterprise level user, we need the ability 
to predict how the simulator will behave under different loads so we can plan 
and provision for different usage scenarios.



                In the very near future we will be releasing our distributed 
PhysX code as well.  This functionality will allow you to dedicate a separate 
server to the physics engine and scale it vertically as appropriate.  We can 
discuss the implications for scaled performance as well as tradeoffs in network 
performance at that time.



                Lastly, we have specific needs that BulletSim cannot 
accommodate.  The decision to choose PhysX for integration was done 
deliberately.  If you would like to join us at the MOSES office hours or 
contact me directly, we can discuss in detail.



                Have a great weekend.  v/r -doug







                Douglas Maxwell, Ph.D.
                Science and Technology Manager
                Virtual World Strategic Applications
                U.S. Army Research Lab
                Human Research & Engineering Directorate
                (c) (407) 242-0209 < tel:%28407%29%20242-0209 > 
________________________________

                From: [email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >  
[[email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] > ] on behalf of Michael 
Emory Cerquoni [[email protected] < Caution-mailto:[email protected] > ]
                Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 11:10 AM
                To: [email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >
                Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [Opensim-dev] PhysX vs. BulletSim 
vs. ODE


                All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please 
verify the identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links 
contained within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a Web 
browser.


________________________________




                I have had over 100,000 physical spheres in Bulletsim without a 
crash and was still able to log in, move around and erase all the objects and 
have performance go back to normal, you need to enable running it in its own 
Thread, to achieve this level of performance. to enable this feature in the 
[BulletSim] section of OpenSim.ini add :

                UseSeparatePhysicsThread = true

                On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Sean M 
<[email protected] < Caution-mailto:[email protected] >  < 
Caution-Caution-mailto:[email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >  > > wrote:



                        Greetings,

                        The MOSES Team has been working on integrating NVIDIA's 
PhysX physics engine into OpenSim. Once complete, this integration will give 
OpenSim grid administrators the option of selecting the new engine for their 
own worlds.

                        Prior to releasing the complete integration, the team 
has begun extensively testing and analyzing the engine's performance. We are 
pleased to report that PhysX significantly improves OpenSim's ability to 
support more physical objects than BulletSim and ODE. Our analysis ran under 
controlled and repeated testing (30 independent OpenSim executions per engine) 
that isolated physics engine related variables. Under these conditions, PhysX 
supported 86% more physical objects than BulletSim (the OpenSim default physics 
engine) before the simulation's performance starts to noticeable degrade. More 
specifically, before dropping below 9 simulation frames per second (SimFPS), 
PhysX supported 3,300 physical objects (AtvPrm), BulletSim 1,800, and ODE 200. 
The reported SimFPS did not use the correction factor; therefore, the highest 
frame rate was 11.33 frames per second. Attached is a graph of the performance 
of the three physics engines as 5,000 physical objects w
 ere generated in the simulation. All experiment details will be available in 
the 2016 proceedings of MODSIM World.

                        Again, we are very pleased with the result and believe 
everyone will benefit from the effort. An announcement will be made in a few 
days to indicate when the final integration code will be available on the MOSES 
public GitHub.

                        Thank you,
                        Sean Mondesire
                        MOSES Team

                        Inline image 1


                        _______________________________________________
                        Opensim-dev mailing list
                        [email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >  < 
Caution-Caution-mailto:[email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >  >
                        
Caution-Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev < 
Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >  < 
Caution-Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev < 
Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >  >







                --

                Michael Emory Cerquoni

                _______________________________________________
                Opensim-dev mailing list
                [email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >

                
Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev < 
Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >





        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [email protected] < 
Caution-mailto:[email protected] >
        Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev < 
Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >





Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

Reply via email to