[sldev] Re: [ARCH] Render unto Caesar...

[Argent Stonecutter]

From: Mike Monkowski <monkowsk at watson.ibm.com>
>> The region doesn't simulate an avatar. All it does is deliver the
>> textures and appearance parameters to the client. The avatar mesh  
>> is  in
>> the client.

> It is now, but do you want to keep it that way?

In the matter of what I *want*, why, I want the mesh to be another  
asset that can be edited by the user and uploaded, along with the  
skeleton. I want to be able to trigger animations selectively,  
overriding the priority, timing, and bones of the anim, or applying  
constraints on the joints beyond the ones built in. I want, dare I  
say it, rag doll animation.

But none of that is really an issue here. In fact all of what I  
*want* could be implemented in the current architecture, and I doubt  
that any architecture that had a significant impact for the worse  
would pass muster, because any architecture that had constraints that  
prevented the creation of new network packets (say, ones carrying the  
overrides I suggested, as well as the UUID of the animation) or asset  
types would almost certainly carry grave restrictions elsewhere.

I really don't think that the architecture needs to be particularly  
concerned with specific new types of assets, but rather that it  
should be able to handle new types of assets efficiently in the  
general case.

> Why keep transferring information from sim to sim if you don't have  
> to?

Locality of reference. If all the data associated with a request is  
cached on the same server, then it can be streamed to the client over  
the same TCP connection. In addition... in the general case the  
network connections between the sims is far faster than the network  
connections between the client and the various hosts, it makes sense  
to cache that information in the sim.

Don't forget, 90% of programming is an exercise in caching.

> When rezzing an object, it wouldn't necessarily belong to the region.
> Only when it is left there permanently would it belong to the region.
> Otherwise it would belong to the avatar and vanish when the avatar
> logged off.

I'm not sure that it makes a lot of sense for the avatar logging off  
should change the responsibility (perhaps a better word than  
ownership, given the conflict here) for a rezzed object. Why wouldn't  
you want the sim to take ownership of the avatar immediately?

> But when an avatar visits a region, everyone else in the region will
> need the mesh information.  They should not have to go back to asset
> storage to get it.

Which answers "Why keep transferring information from sim to sim if  
you don't have to?", no?