On Wed, 2008-12-31 at 17:35 +0100, Per Jessen wrote: > c...@l-i-e.com wrote: > > > > >>> I often thought PHP would be a nice language for a MUD, if one could > >>> get the performance out of it... > >> > >> Design your code such that you can just throw more hardware at it > >> whenever you need more performance. > > > > That's easily said, but a MUD means all the users have to share a > > significant portion of your data model. > > That's fine - there are many well-known schemes for distributing and > updating such data. > > > Though I suspect the bandwidth issue would be the main bottleneck most > > of the time... > > I don't want to get into this in much detail, mainly because I've > > spent all of 5 minutes seriously thinking about it, and may just need > > more bake-time... > > But it's not ALWAYS that easy to architect something to be > > "shared-nothing" even with PHP. > > It's not easy in any language, but if your key concern is the > performance of PHP (as a language), hardware is what you need. You can > design your software to run on a single box with lots of CPU cores, or > you can go for a distributed (and more easily scalable) approach. If > you don't need/want straight scalability, go for the 32 cores all > ticking at 3GHz. Once that is saturated, buy another one.
If you go multi core then you need to go with a threaded approach... which makes the development a bit complex for newbies to MUD development. I don't think I'd go distributed since people whine about lag that takes a 1/4 second... distributed would inherently require more time while messages are passed to and fro. Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
