|
Bluto Brando
Registered User
Join date: 24 Jan 2007
Posts: 6
|
09-07-2008 09:28
That is one of the most popular issues the people I know talk about, why can we not have more than 25 groups we can join? Anyone have the answer?
|
|
Ceera Murakami
Texture Artist / Builder
Join date: 9 Sep 2005
Posts: 7,750
|
09-07-2008 09:34
From: Bluto Brando That is one of the most popular issues the people I know talk about, why can we not have more than 25 groups we can join? Anyone have the answer? It's to limit asset server load. Every time you cross from one parcel to another, it checks to see what groups you are in, so it knows if you have access to that parcel or not based on group memberships.
_____________________
Sorry, LL won't let me tell you where I sell my textures and where I offer my services as a sim builder. Ask me in-world.
|
|
Kathy Morellet
Registered User
Join date: 26 Jul 2006
Posts: 809
|
09-07-2008 09:35
According to the Lindens it causes a lot of stress on the servers to deal with groups. And the 25 we have don't work right most of the time.
A lot of us wish we had more but don't expect it to change any time soon.
|
|
Clubside Granville
Registered Bonehead
Join date: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 478
|
09-07-2008 13:57
These limits reveal a more troubling scalability issue within Second Life. While the one region = one simulator formula forces restrictions that could have been dealt with is a distributed system from inception, things such as presence and IM were built from the beginning with distributed services to begin with yet are choking and wheezing at only a few dozen thousands of simultaneous users. In comparison the presence and communication facilities of IM clients and broad social services deftly handle millions of simultaneous users.
Things such as parcel access checks are but milliseconds of computing resources and unlike IMs happening anywhere are localized to a single server's tasks which are minimal. The underlying presence engine is too deeply flawed. Its redesign is surely part of initiatives to increase scalability, but Second Life's root flaws of disconnected design will make short-term success unlikely.
_____________________
Second Life Home Page Forums - slhomepage.com Second Life Handbook - slhandbook.com Second Life Mainland - slmainland.com
|
|
Mandra Moody
Registered User
Join date: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 5
|
09-07-2008 14:42
^^ agrees with above. now if LL would get better servers...ones that weren't 4 years old....but while i'm dreaming i'd like a pony. i worked for the top 2 ISP's on the planet and their servers had tremendous resources as well as heavy load and multiple apps running throughout, now we had alot of node issues but sparsely and they could still run circles around these....it's not like the money isn't there. I am glad to see at least continual effort from LL but the core of these ongoing daily issues is server performance once thats dealt with (if ever) we could have more groups 
|
|
Ciaran Laval
Mostly Harmless
Join date: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 7,951
|
09-07-2008 14:43
Use Hippo Groups or subscribe-o-matic if you want social groups rather than land groups.
|
|
Toy LaFollette
I eat paintchips
Join date: 11 Feb 2004
Posts: 2,359
|
09-07-2008 15:40
no matter what had for group limits, some would not be happy. I seldom have 20 and can easily remember them being 10.
_____________________
"So you see, my loyalty lies with Second Life, not with Linden Lab. Where I perceive the actions of Linden Lab to be in conflict with the best interests of Second Life, I side with Second Life."-Jacek
|
|
Nuno McCullough
PixelDolls' wholesaler
Join date: 28 Dec 2007
Posts: 275
|
09-08-2008 03:19
That's one of the reasons I have other alts, when we rent home and several shops soon the 25 groups would become ridiculous short
_____________________
http://slurl.com/secondlife/Liome/196/65/44
http://pixeldolls.wordpress.com/ http://nmhautecouture.wordpress.com/
|