| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:23 |
|
ShadowBot joined #minetest-dev |
| 00:29 |
|
ShadowBot joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:52 |
|
kilbith__ joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:23 |
|
diceLibrarian joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:42 |
|
dzho joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:42 |
|
dzho joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:00 |
MTDiscord |
<MisterE> Im pleased to report that minetest on android works better than it has in many years with the release candidate. The bug where minetest would close (though remain in the app drawer) as soon as it was opened is fixed. The bug where minetest being minimized to the app drawer caused a loss of server connection is fixed. Bloom and post-processing seem to work. Shadows still do not work. |
| 04:23 |
|
calcul0n joined #minetest-dev |
| 05:00 |
|
MTDiscord joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:49 |
|
Baytuch joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:54 |
|
Baytuch joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:39 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:45 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:01 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:20 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:42 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:46 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:19 |
|
Wuzzy joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:40 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:52 |
|
kilbith_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:16 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:17 |
|
LandarVargan joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:46 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:47 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:45 |
kilbith_ |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/13296 |
| 15:59 |
|
fluxionary joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:08 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:14 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:18 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:23 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:41 |
|
Desour joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:05 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:05 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:31 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:32 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:38 |
|
appguru joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:58 |
rubenwardy |
should #13200 be on the 5.7 milestone? |
| 20:58 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13200 -- Fix missing particlespawner values by velartrill |
| 21:41 |
|
lhofhansl1 joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:42 |
|
lhofhansl joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:42 |
lhofhansl |
Let's think about #13250 and #13225. |
| 21:42 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13250 -- Scale culler steps proportionally to the mesh sizes by x2048 |
| 21:42 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13225 -- Fix infinite viewing_range by lhofhansl |
| 21:43 |
lhofhansl |
I'm happy to finish 13225, I'd like 13250 to go in first. |
| 21:47 |
rubenwardy |
why do you need to fix infinite view range twice? |
| 21:48 |
rubenwardy |
for good measure? |
| 21:54 |
sfan5 |
the new culler perform bad over long distances |
| 21:54 |
sfan5 |
the kind of distances range_all is used at |
| 22:00 |
lhofhansl |
We can remove the infinite part of 13250... But it is needed for performance at larger (non-infinite) viewing ranges. |
| 22:01 |
lhofhansl |
13225 pulls parts of the old culler back. We have since learned how to make it work with the client mesh chunking. |
| 22:03 |
lhofhansl |
The new culler performs bad when only a small fraction of the potentially visible is loaded at the client, because it has traverse the unloaded blocks as well, while the old culler starts from the loaded blocks (but does that much slower) |
| 22:03 |
lhofhansl |
badly |
| 22:09 |
rubenwardy |
how bad does it perform without #13250? How much risk is that PR? |
| 22:09 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13250 -- Scale culler steps proportionally to the mesh sizes by x2048 |
| 22:11 |
rubenwardy |
I guess pretty badly |
| 22:11 |
lhofhansl |
For viewing_range of 1000 before that PR the culler can go up 70ms or more. I.e. every 0.2s you see a 70ms blip. The new culler comfortably stays below 5ms. |
| 22:11 |
lhofhansl |
That part I'd want. :) |
| 22:11 |
lhofhansl |
I've seen it go to 100ms even. |
| 22:12 |
lhofhansl |
(Relatively fast Laptop) |
| 22:12 |
rubenwardy |
The reason I questioned it is that performance PRs aren't usually allowed in feature freezes, but this seems close enough to a bug fix |
| 22:13 |
lhofhansl |
I could argue this from both sides :) The old culler was even slower at that viewing_range, so it's already better. |
| 22:14 |
lhofhansl |
(I mean the old loops culler that we removed, and I would partially bring back for the infinite vewing_range) |
| 22:16 |
lhofhansl |
Or I could say that the culler fix is really needed for the client mesh chunking, and should be considered part of that. |
| 22:28 |
lhofhansl |
I'll say one more thing: The current culler is bad enough at larg'ish viewing_range that I went through the trouble of #13207. With this PR that is completely unneeded. |
| 22:28 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13207 -- Spread updating the drawlist over multiple frames. by lhofhansl |
| 22:46 |
|
pgimeno_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:54 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
