MOO-cows Mailing List Archive
Re: HTML + MOO + NT = ???
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 13:15:16 PST
From: Don Mitchell <email@example.com>
Encoding: 21 TEXT
If you think your MOO or ColdMUD is going to be a very big world, NT
would be a better choice than W95. In theory, you should be able to
tune the network I/O and use a few I/O threads to get more throughput.
I wonder if anyone has experimented with this? A 'thread per head"
doesn't seem wise (i/e/, one thread per connected player), but having a
few of them doing the network I/O will practically never block. You
could also try using async I/O (which W95 doesn't do). I noticed that
FurryMUCK runs a seperate UNIX process just to do network I/O and
concentrate it to the actual MUCK server -- basically the same idea, but
I/O threads would be more efficient. And of course, if you have a
multiprocessor PC, multi threading gets you some parallel processing as
well. But read/write blocking is the main reason to do this. If you
think the world is REALLY going to be huge, you probably need Server NT,
which unfortunately is expensive. I know ftp servers running SNT deal
with 600 connections or so, but I don't think any MUD on the net is that
big. Furry gets close to 400 on their P-100 machine (they're running
Anyway, with NT or UNIX, it would be fun to hear about experiments with
multi-threading and async I/O.
Subject Index |