February 1997
- Its nice to be back Nathan Yospe
- Its nice to be back coder@ibm.net
- Its nice to be back Nathan Yospe
- Testing coder@ibm.net
- Invitation to MUD Design Mailing List Chris Gray
- Invitation to MUD Design Mailing List coder@ibm.net
- Invitation to MUD Design Mailing List coder@ibm.net
- Invitation to MUD Design Mailing List coder@ibm.net
- Invitation to MUD Design Mailing List coder@ibm.net
- Wout's mailing list and old digests coder@ibm.net
- Wout's mailing list and old digests Wout Mertens
- Wout's mailing list and old digests coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Nathan Yospe
- Just a bit of musing Adam Wiggins
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Carter T Shock
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing S001GMU@nova.wright.edu
- Just a bit of musing Dmitri Kondratiev
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Dmitri Kondratiev
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing clawrenc@cup.hp.com
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Carter T Shock
- Just a bit of musing Alex Oren
- Just a bit of musing Wout Mertens
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Wout Mertens
- Just a bit of musing Carter T Shock
- Just a bit of musing S001GMU@nova.wright.edu
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Nathan Yospe
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing Adam Wiggins
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing GnomesHome@aol.com
- Just a bit of musing Carter T Shock
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Adam Wiggins
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Adam Wiggins
- Just a bit of musing claw@null.net
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing claw@null.net
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
> From: coder@ibm.net
> Every event executes asynchronously in its own thread using a lockless
> model.
>
> The server core consists of the following base units:
> -- DB
> -- Dispatchor
> -- Executor
> -- Connection
<snip>
>
> User IO arrives thru the Connector. The connector is essentially a
pool of
> threads which asynchronously manage the general pool of outside
connections.
> A seperate monitor is responsible for keeping the IO network tree
happy.
>
> User commands arrive at the Connector and are immediately sent to the
> Dispatchor as Execute-In-Zero-Time (ie no delay) events. The event
logged
> is acutally to parse the command as entered. The dispatchor then
routes
> the event to the Executor, it runs the event and the resultant parse
creates
> a new event which is logged with the Dispatchor to actually execute the
> intended action.
I am particularly interested in how your pool of threads manages socket
connections.
Are these threads dynamically created to manage connections? That is, do
you
n+1 threads managing your connections, where n is active connections plus
one
to handle connection requests on the master socket? Are sockets blocked or
do
you use some other method of activating threads?
<snip>
>
> Well, given an SMP machine, with an OS that will intelligently
distributes
> threads -- that all semi happens for free with me (its not quite so good
> as I try to minimise thread creations, as few to no current OS'es will
> migrate a thread across processors for load sharing). On the other side,
> a definite design goal of my server is for it so support running in
> clustered enviroments where the entire cluster presents a single
> representation of a game.
It is my understanding that many OSs that implement multi-processing will
allocate one CPU for the OS and the rest of the available units to
application
threads. NT 3.51 does this as well as many Unixes. I thought OS2 used
this
model also. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
It is also my understanding that NT 4.0 uses a different model and
implements
"load sharing" as you define it above. I have heard rumors that Digital's
64-bit Unix
uses the "load sharing" model. Does anyone have any info on this? - Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Carter T. Shock
- Just a bit of musing claw@null.net
- Just a bit of musing Wout Mertens
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Adam Wiggins
- Just a bit of musing coder@ibm.net
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing Chris Gray
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing Travis Casey
- Just a bit of musing Jon A. Lambert
- Just a bit of musing clawrenc@cup.hp.com
- Just a bit of musing Nathan Yospe
- Just a bit of musing clawrenc@cup.hp.com
- Quadtrees? Wout Mertens
- Quadtrees? coder@ibm.net
- Quadtrees? Greg Munt
- Quadtrees? Ola Fosheim Grøstad
- Quadtrees? Ling
- Quadtrees? Miroslav Silovic
- Quadtrees? Chris Gray
- Quadtrees? Carter T Shock
- Quadtrees? S001GMU@nova.wright.edu
- Quadtrees? Carter T Shock
- Quadtrees? S001GMU@nova.wright.edu
- Quadtrees? coder@ibm.net
- Quadtrees? Chris Gray
- Quadtrees? Carter T Shock
- Quadtrees? coder@ibm.net
- Quadtrees? claw@kanga.nu