Re: [UM1-coders] Object Store

[J.P. K. <jp...@he...>]

> IPC via anything other than shared memory is roughly 10,000 times slower
> than in-process memory reference.  IPC via shared memory would be liable to
> exactly the same problems we have now, namely data corruption.

_10000_ ?  I find that hard to swallow, but assuming that it is
true, this means that if you can make the access 10000 times faster
than you need it to be then this isn't a problem.

The game used to run on a 16MHz 68020 as I recall, but lets say we
talk about the 20-25MHz IPC that it used to run on - now lets compare
this with a 167MHz Ultra1, with its improved memory access.  Now
compare that to a dual CPU E250 (which is what I expect the next
machine to be at present).

No we aren't up to 10,000 times, but we are well into the hundreds.
Once you get up to a multiple GHz CPU we should more or less be there. :-)

The main delay with multiple processes is context switching, but if
you only have two active processes this shouldn't be much of an issue.
If the delay were _quite_ as bad as you are suggesting then why don't
all this big database people build webservers, and the like, into their
SQL servers - I am sure that people would pay for a factor of 10 increase, 
let alone a factor of 10000.

> ... assuming the data has remained internally consistent.  This seems
> unlikely.
The object store will be able to bounce back faster than the mud with
the object store built in by virtue of the fact that there will be
less code.

Whether the Object Store copes well with the stress we would want to
impose on it is another matter.  If it doesn't then it isn't the product
for us.

> > How expensive are the non-free ones?
> Multiple hundreds to multiple thousands of pounds per seat, from memory.
> Server licences are more.
Oh well, bang goes that idea then ;-)

> 		- Peter


Julian