Crossfire Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CF: Client and images
On Feb 26, 11:44am, Scott MacFiggen wrote:
> Ahh, I hadn't realized that. That is just as good as a
> static mapping then. However, I still firmly believe that
> users should have the option to download the images
> before hand.
it would be pretty trivial to add support in the client to download all needed
images before (basically, just add a client request of something like
image_names 0 500 which tells the server it wants the name->number mappings for
images 0->500. Client updates its records, and if it doesn't have any of those
images, uses the normal request mechanism to get a copy.)
>
> I also forgot to bring up another point last night which
> may or may not be a big deal. If the
> clients have copies of the 'base'
> images,, then the server won't have to store
> all these images in memory. Considering the
> xpm file is 3.5 meg, that seems like a big win
> to me.
In theory, the server never has to store the xpm images in memory - that is
the way Eric originally wrote the code. The images could just as easily be
kept in a file and then sent for that matter.
However, in all cases, the server probably needs to keep a local set of images
around - after all, if any new images are added, the server will have to be
able to send them to the client. As a client user, you probably don't want to
have to download 500k of data to get just 2 images.
In any case, 3.5 megs isn't a lot, and will likely get swapped out in most
cases. Ram is pretty cheap nowadays anyways, and keeping them in memory will
likely give at least a slightly better performance gain when needing to send
them.
--
-- Mark Wedel
mark@pyramid.com
[to unsubscribe etc., send mail to crossfire-request@ifi.uio.no]
Follow-Ups:
References: