Hi Muriel, how´re doing. I have a different case to say you.
On our project we´re having the same problem with sharedObjects on Red5 0.6r3 (or latest, doesn´t matter), let me explain: Our project is a Card Game project based on a lot of rooms (subScopes) and a main Lobby (parentScope). We are using 5 sharedObject on MainScope and 1 SharedObject for each room. Today we have been 300 connected users playing our game, we was all the time looking cpu usage, and i can tell you that it is always on a 99% of usage. After a while Red5 freeze again. I´m thinking to change our approach of SO´s to Server-Side <-> Client-Side methods, i´m wondering that it will be better. We´re very desperate to solve this issue, anyone has another opinion ? Thanks, Luiz Filipe. -----Mensagem original----- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] nome de John Grden Enviada em: quinta-feira, 19 de abril de 2007 13:55 Para: [email protected] Assunto: Re: [Red5] RMI or Shared Objects Me too, I was just about to say the exact 2 things Jake said! BRIAN - you lurker you ;) On 4/19/07, Jake Hilton < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I knew it! .. I felt a lurker such as your self.. LOL :) But on topic.. I don't use shared objects much .. but use nc.call's for a lot of my interaction. Jake On 4/19/07, Brian Lesser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Muriel, I'm just a lurker here and am not using Red5 but was wondering what you mean by: "as the Shared Objects are emptied after a message has been received"? Yours truly, -Brian muriel wrote: >Hi all, > >we just had an interesting discussion with a Flash expert about Shared >Object communication. Until now, we have been using Red5 Shared Objects >for client-server communication in a multiplayer game setup. As we have >all kinds of communication (broadcast to room, some users, single user), >we have set up an architecture with two Shared Objects per client (two >distinguish input from output). We are now observing some performance >problems on the clients as well as the Red5 server (99 % CPU usage with >33 clients updating the Shared Objects every 0.1 seconds, btw with 33 >clients 66 Shared Objects have to be handled by the server). On the >server-side, however, we don't have any memory problems, as the Shared >Objects are emptied after a message has been received. Memory is at >around 4% and remains quite stable throughout the application. > >The Flash (Media Server) expert proposed to use an invoke of a >client-side method rather than a Shared Object as this is more efficient >for the client to handle. Do you think the server performance issues >could be due to the Shared Objects? And does it make sense to change >from Shared Object communication to RMI? > >Is there anyone who has experienced similar problems? > >Thanks for helping, >Muriel > > > >_______________________________________________ >Red5 mailing list > [email protected] > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org > > -- ______________________________________________________________________ Brian Lesser Assistant Director, Application Development and Integration Computing and Communications Services Ryerson University 350 Victoria St. Toronto, Ontario Phone: (416) 979-5000 ext. 6835 M5B 2K3 Fax: (416) 979-5220 Office: POD B-66-C E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Enter through LIB-B99) Web: http://www.ryerson.ca/~blesser ______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Red5 mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org _______________________________________________ Red5 mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org -- [ JPG ]
_______________________________________________ Red5 mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/red5_osflash.org
