Michael J. Fara wrote:
> I tried the patch on my MUD and noticed almost 25% difference in memory usage.
>
> MUD w/one player & no patch: 6.4% Memory Usage
> MUD w/one player & patch: 4.9% Memory Usage
>
> I have decided to wait to permanently install until the next version to
> come out. It raises many conflicts with OasisOLC, but overall it is a good
> patch.
>
> At 11:16 AM 2/20/98 -0800, Daniel Koepke wrote:
> >Not that "manual memory paging" hasn't been suggested before; check
> >the archives. I believe the argument against it has always been that
> >most operating systems already do automatic memory paging that is
> >infinitely more efficient than anything that could be done in
> >software (over the kernel). From my point of view, since Win95 and
> >UNIX operating systems will do disk swapping when it is needed.
> >
> >-dak
Daniel Koepke has a valid point. Another approach you could try is investigating
the Death Gate code (at ftp.imaxx.net/~thrytis) for its use of a
shared string manager. In short, most any lenthy description is stored in one
central table along with a counter of how many things use it (objects, mobs,
rooms, doesn't matter). This means that you'll save memory on anything
redundant, and that you could code a change of description for an individual
mobile, for example, without messing with the prototype - which you could use to
say, code a beefed-up animate dead spell.
Daniel Houghton AKA Garadon
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: |
| http://democracy.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list-faq.html |
+------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/15/00 PST