[opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list
carlo at alinoe.com
Sat Apr 17 06:27:20 PDT 2010
Scaling of group messages is simple however.
With one server per group you get a long way.
Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average.
Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so
you can keep adding groups to a server until
the total number of group members is around 20,000.
Then you add a server.
The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS
system, for example <hash-of-group-name>.groups.secondlife.com
And if you throw a good socket library against it
(not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000
users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise.
Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed
in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server
and they can tell you how to do that.
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote:
> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K
> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people
> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a
> quite heavy loaded system.
> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple
> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting
> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.
Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com>
More information about the opensource-dev