Re: [Antbear-devel] Architecture questions

[wolpers]

On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 09:47, Adam Ferla wrote:
> Hey peoples
> 
> Just a quick question regarding Thorstens comment about using a single 
> thread to process client request. Are we using a premade database or 
> building a simple one ourselves? If we use a premaid database the database 
> will probably have functionality to allow multiple reads, etc to a database, 
> in which case multithreaded client processing would be an advantage., i.e. a 
> listener thread creates a new thread for each client request. However, if we 
> make our own database then I agree that single threaded client processing 
> would be cool.

I have been thinking about that and so far I like the idea of an
integrated,selfmade database better.  If you think different please
teach me.  When thinking about using a premade database a few points
come to my mind:

- I do not like the idea of creating an antbear that requires a certain
(type of) database to be installed before it can be used.  So we would
have to find a database we can integrate into the antbear.  One point
would be the license, the other one would be the idea that I do not
really want antbear to require  access to installed files.  I would like
antbear to be usable 'out of the box' with no requirements, but Java, an
optional settings file and optional parameters.  So we would require a
pure Java 'all in memory/swap' database.  The amount of data we would
store is not too large. (about 30000 server addresses whith details on
each server: runningmod, name, map, maxplayers, currentplayers,
playernames).
-  Would a premade database give us any advantage in performance as
opposed to a selfmade one?  Might the interface between antbear and the
database slow things down? I have no experience with that.
- There was one more, but I forgot 8( .

> 
> P.S. sorry my involvement has been rather minimal lately. I just recently 
> found out that hotmail was sending most of the antbear emails to my junk 
> mail folder (even though it hasnt in the past). This problem has been 
> rectified.

8)

- Thorsten