3 ms·
Figma's case is more challenging in some ways, too, though. In multiplayer games, like the one described on your website, you rarely have multiple actors indepe
by coreyward 7y ago
Figma's case is more challenging in some ways, too, though. In multiplayer games, like the one described on your website, you rarely have multiple actors independently manipulating the same object, there's a moderate tolerance for imperfect resolution of conflicts, and the server can reject messages that are more than a few seconds out of sync with the server state.
Figma needs to have very consistent, predictable resolution in order for users to trust it with business-critical documents, and it needs to allow users to operate offline for arbitrarily long periods without throwing their work away when they reconnect. This has to happen across multiple versions of the software, and across documents (e.g. when dependency libraries are republished).
- ggambetta 7y agoYep, I agree the use case is somewhat different - I wrote as much after the link. Probably why calling this "multiplayer" sounds weird.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]