Minetest logo

IRC log for #minetest-dev, 2014-11-05

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:16 OldCoder iqualfragile VanessaE they improve performance if turned up?
00:16 OldCoder Faster at tradeoff for memory?
00:17 VanessaE depends on your pipe really
00:17 VanessaE I stopped at 500, I am not sure if going higher will be any better
00:17 VanessaE but up to THAT point, it was.
00:17 VanessaE as sapier explained it, it's the number of blocks that can be "on the wire" at any one time.
00:18 OldCoder kkty
00:44 celeron55 those are all about network performance
00:45 celeron55 if your connection gets congested, that's the lag the players will get
00:45 celeron55 (if blocks are being transferred)
00:46 celeron55 so, setting it to 1 will keep lag always at the minimum, but will decrease maximum speed
00:46 celeron55 in a very natural way
00:46 hmmmm whatever happened to that guy with the client sendblocks
00:46 celeron55 oh also
00:46 hmmmm client request blocks rather
00:46 celeron55 that also includes the mesh generation queue on the client
00:46 celeron55 so it will have a different effect on fast and slow machines
00:47 celeron55 hmmmm: i forked and developed it and never got it working properly; keep in mind that this was before the upstream network work by sapier, i.e. very old
00:48 celeron55 the current implementation is way better at managing network resources than that one
00:48 celeron55 but the biggest issue was that it just hanged occasionally
00:49 hmmmm i take it that you never solved the hang issue
00:49 hmmmm erm, i mean figured out what causes the hang issue
00:49 celeron55 there's a probability that it was fixed by sapier
00:50 celeron55 but really you first need to define what you're expecting to gain from using that branch
00:50 hmmmm i need to seriously un-fuck EmergeThread's block queueing before this gets solved :(
00:50 VanessaE hmmmm: client request blocks was itself blocked anyway as I recall
00:50 hmmmm celeron, better design
00:51 VanessaE it was decided that this should not be possible.
00:51 celeron55 VanessaE: afaik you are making this up
00:51 VanessaE nope.avi
00:51 celeron55 or has this been decided lately?
00:51 hmmmm i want the client to keep a d-radiused cube of mapblocks
00:52 celeron55 i don't recall this from the time that i was working on it
00:52 hmmmm like minecraft
00:52 VanessaE last time this was discussed, someone here decided quite firmly "no"
00:52 VanessaE and specifically that the server would somehow be better at deciding what the client should get than the client would.
00:52 hmmmm the exact opposite was said
00:52 hmmmm client knows best..
00:52 hmmmm esp. with the server assuming FOV
00:52 hmmmm horrible
00:52 VanessaE hmmmm: I would have thought so, but no.  that was not the consensus.
00:52 hmmmm well
00:53 hmmmm i don't know where you're getting this but it's plain technically incorrect
00:53 hmmmm client request blocks would not be blocked by anybody
00:53 * VanessaE sighs
00:53 hmmmm erase from your mind whatever you currently are thinking
00:56 VanessaE http://irc.minetest.ru/minet​est-dev/2013-05-17#i_3093163
00:56 VanessaE I'm pretty sure sapier's word counts as a legit "veto" here.
00:57 hmmmm shit you're right, let's just completely drop the discussion now because some log from 1.5 years ago has sapier bringing up a concern.
00:58 VanessaE no one's saying drop it.  but I'd be quite appreciative if folks would discard the "you are making this up" and the like.
00:59 hmmmm here:
01:00 VanessaE http://irc.minetest.ru/minet​est-dev/2014-04-18#i_3655854
01:00 VanessaE there, a little more recent then.
01:00 hmmmm 1).  client doesn't need to guess what blocks have been invalidated.  the server can still send those
01:00 hmmmm 2).  throttling individual clients is quite trivial
01:00 hmmmm 3).  this would eliminate the need for the server to guess or have to spend time calculating the client's FOV
01:01 hmmmm 4).  this is better design to begin with
01:01 VanessaE agreed on all points.
01:01 hmmmm 5).  the client can prioritize which blocks
01:07 celeron55 i can see various issues in this though, it might not be so simple to get it work in a way that doesn't work worse in practice
01:09 celeron55 for example, the current block selection thing also sends updated blocks to the client, and even prioritizes those too
01:12 hmmmm the server assumes which blocks the client has though
01:12 hmmmm are blocks sent as reliable?  (i forget)
01:12 celeron55 of course they are
01:13 celeron55 how would you expect it to work otherwise
01:13 celeron55 they generally span multiple UDP packets
01:13 celeron55 or, well, vary between being a fraction of a UDP packet, and a UDP packet being a fraction of a block
01:17 celeron55 (the first case is handled by, like any short packet, by sending a shorter udp packet, which is inefficient bandwidth-wise (but efficient lag-wise (which can be inappropriate in this case)))
01:20 hmmmm how much space do you estimate is consumed by block metadata?
01:20 celeron55 what is block metadata?
01:21 hmmmm node metadata
01:21 celeron55 hopefully generally zero
01:22 celeron55 sleep ->
01:47 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
02:04 diemartin joined #minetest-dev
02:18 Taoki joined #minetest-dev
03:13 Sokomine regarding block send: someone asked about local caching of mapblocks from a server (as a second usage of the save to localmap branch). that might also be very intresting
03:30 CraigyDavi joined #minetest-dev
04:03 Zeno` joined #minetest-dev
04:42 Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev
05:22 Zeno` 1000 fps barrier broken
06:41 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
06:42 CraigyDavi` joined #minetest-dev
07:01 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
07:02 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
07:35 kilbith joined #minetest-dev
08:01 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
08:37 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
08:39 proller joined #minetest-dev
08:52 FR^2 joined #minetest-dev
09:19 Fritigern Zeno`: Remember how yesterday doubletap_jump was not changed in minetest.conf? Well, today i noticed that my server is not in the serverlist whilst it is supposed to be, my minetest.conf checks out so it must be related to the dev version that i use. (latest git)
09:19 Zeno` I'm not sure it's related
09:19 Zeno` VanessaE's servers are also not there
09:20 Fritigern Weird
09:20 VanessaE it is not related.
09:20 VanessaE I'm not using zeno's latest patches or even a particularly recent build
09:21 kahrl is it related to the latest commits in https://github.com/minetest/master-server?
09:21 Zeno` I didn't touch server-related files at any rate :)
09:21 Fritigern Well, you can not blame me for thinking that it was, seeing as it too is a minetest.conf setting not being honored :-)
09:21 kahrl s/commits/commit
09:22 VanessaE I'm about 2 weeks behind, commit 737cce5f plus a patch sapier wanted me to try out (dbf97af0)
09:23 VanessaE kahrl: it may be; my servers were first reported as missing from the list just yesterday evening.
09:23 VanessaE (but that one tiny commit, I haven't the foggiest idea what it would do)
09:24 Fritigern My server has been quiet all day, but since mine is a minor server, i didn;t think much of it until i checked the list about 30 minutes ago
09:36 VanessaE bbl
09:54 sfan5 kahrl: possibly, I did a git pull of that commit yesterday and restarted uwsgi
10:31 RiZom-91 joined #minetest-dev
10:51 RealBadAngel Zeno`, 1k fps?
10:51 RealBadAngel have you put your hands on nasa's mainframe or what?
10:51 Zeno` RBA, 1400
10:52 Zeno` anyway, can you test #1804
10:52 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1804 -- Fix regression and make minor improvements in the_game by Zeno-
10:52 RealBadAngel on it
10:52 Zeno` lol, nah it's not on a mainframe
10:53 RealBadAngel just their laptop? ;)
10:53 Zeno` and that PR won't get the speed ups (I need that PR to make the cache keys PR though)
10:53 Zeno` yeah I stole their laptop
10:53 Zeno` I can only get 1400fps if I look at the ground (heh)
10:55 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
10:56 RealBadAngel what are your system specs anyway?
11:07 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
11:08 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
11:12 proller joined #minetest-dev
11:38 Zeno` RBA: any issues with #1804 ?
11:38 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1804 -- Fix regression and make minor improvements in the_game by Zeno-
11:51 PenguinDad joined #minetest-dev
12:03 RealBadAngel Zeno`, not yet
12:04 RealBadAngel i will just play with it for a while
12:23 proller joined #minetest-dev
12:42 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
13:13 alexxs joined #minetest-dev
13:31 sol_invictus joined #minetest-dev
13:31 proller joined #minetest-dev
13:38 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
13:54 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
14:00 proller joined #minetest-dev
14:04 AnotherBrick joined #minetest-dev
14:25 iqualfragile joined #minetest-dev
14:58 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:00 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:02 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:03 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:03 MinetestForFun joined #minetest-dev
15:04 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
15:11 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:13 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:13 Zeno` what's it take to get a bug fix merged? :p   #1804
15:13 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1804 -- Fix regression and make minor improvements in the_game by Zeno-
15:18 Chicken_shadow joined #minetest-dev
15:21 mos_basik_ joined #minetest-dev
15:22 kaeza joined #minetest-dev
15:30 hmmmm joined #minetest-dev
15:32 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
15:34 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
15:48 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
15:57 proller joined #minetest-dev
16:02 iqualfragile joined #minetest-dev
16:15 GrimKriegor joined #minetest-dev
16:18 Hunterz left #minetest-dev
16:52 rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev
16:52 johnnyjoy joined #minetest-dev
17:19 Hunterz joined #minetest-dev
17:27 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
17:45 MinetestForFun_ joined #minetest-dev
17:52 Garmine joined #minetest-dev
17:52 Guest5693 joined #minetest-dev
17:56 Krock joined #minetest-dev
18:13 Calinou joined #minetest-dev
18:15 mos_basik joined #minetest-dev
18:33 Garmine joined #minetest-dev
18:33 Garmine joined #minetest-dev
18:35 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
18:39 RealBadAngel joined #minetest-dev
18:42 jin_xi joined #minetest-dev
18:49 CraigyDavi`` joined #minetest-dev
18:54 CraigyDavi` joined #minetest-dev
19:40 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
20:07 zat joined #minetest-dev
20:08 sapier joined #minetest-dev
20:19 zat joined #minetest-dev
20:36 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
20:36 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
20:41 Chicken_shadow joined #minetest-dev
20:44 FR^2 joined #minetest-dev
20:47 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
21:04 jin_xi joined #minetest-dev
21:08 zat1 joined #minetest-dev
21:11 AnotherBrick joined #minetest-dev
21:14 CraigyDavi`` joined #minetest-dev
21:17 paramat joined #minetest-dev
21:24 PenguinDad joined #minetest-dev
21:26 jin_xi joined #minetest-dev
21:32 iqualfragile joined #minetest-dev
21:39 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
21:41 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
21:48 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
21:50 proller joined #minetest-dev
22:26 paramat hmmmm, i have 2 mapgen-related pull requests here, what do you think? https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/pull/339 https://github.com/minetest/minetest_game/pull/336
22:46 paramat for 336 the mapgen issue is the defaultifying of pine trees, which means creating default schematics. we could perhaps have multiple pinetree schematics in different sizes
23:04 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
23:04 sapier left #minetest-dev
23:30 jin_xi joined #minetest-dev
23:33 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev
23:52 shadowzone joined #minetest-dev

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext