Additionally to that, the amount of traffic that goes through the actual sim these days has been highly reduced with bringing textures, mesh and materials onto the sim-external HTTP pipeline that isn't bound to a single sim.
Of course there is still people who feverishly set their texture pipeline to UDP because that's what they did a year ago when the HTTP pipeline was less mature. One of those people has more impact on the performance on sim-entry than any person with a 3k bandwidth setting, but HTTP-enabled texture pipeline, will ever cause these days. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Darien Caldwell <darien.caldw...@gmail.com>wrote: > Problem with your example is, you assume the % of bandwidth is constant. > If downloading data was a constant 40% or 4%, I would agree. But SL is a > very bursty service. Once you have the data for the scene, it uses very, > very little bandwidth at all. So all of that bandwidth is not being > utilized constantly. If a sim has 39 people who have been there awhile, and > they are each using 1% (which is more likely a number), there's a lot of > spare bandwidth. no reason it can't be utilized to quickly get the new > arrival also down to 1%. > > Now should all 40 people arrive at once, and all try to download the whole > sim (and each other) all at one time, sure they could be some contention. > But that's what Servers are made to do, route, prioritize, and serve data. > Considering at high speeds, 12 sims worth of data can be downloaded in 1-2 > minutes (which is a ridiculous worst case scenario, but happens since LL > won't realistically limit draw distances), they are unlikely to tie things > up for long. And people with very slow connections are already used to > loading times that order on 10-15 mintues or more. No amount of giving them > a larger share is going to improve that. They are their own bottleneck. > > So no matter how you slice it, limiting fast connections to uber-slow > speeds isn't going to actually help anyone. It sounds a bit > like schadenfreude toward people who can afford a good connection; "make > them wait like I have to". > > But that's ok. being limited to 3kbps isn't horrible. It could certainly > be worse. > > But it could certainly be better. > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Argent Stonecutter < > secret.arg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 2013-07-30, at 10:25, Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> wrote: >> > Well, since everyone has to download the same amount of data >> > in the end, its rather hard to use a "disproportional" amount >> > of resources, unless a viewer just downloads the SAME thing >> > over and over again, which would be severe bug. >> >> Let's say we have avatar A and avatar B. Avatar A is throttled to 4% of >> the spare bandwidth of a sim, and avatar B has a nice fast pipe and us >> capable of using 40% of the spare bandwidth of the sim. >> >> Avatar A arrives, and slows everyone down by 4% for 10 minutes. Nobody >> notices. Even if half a dozen such avatars arrive, nobody cares. >> >> Avatar B arrives, and slows everyone down by 40% for 1 minute. If you >> have multiple such avatars arriving at the same time, you'll have a pretty >> sick sim. >> >> Avatar B is using a disproportional amount of the available bandwidth. >> _______________________________________________ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
