3 ms·
Hmm, I still think spatially allocated servers offer the best scalability. You would just have to approach it a little differently. Server boundaries could mov
by lwansbrough 5y ago
Hmm, I still think spatially allocated servers offer the best scalability. You would just have to approach it a little differently.
Server boundaries could move based on where the population is via delaunay triangulation (instead of fixed boundaries), and servers could share high-importance information with their immediate bordering neighbours. (This would be recognized as ghost data on the neighbouring servers.) You could even go further and have neighbours share ghost data with their other neighbours at a lower fidelity/frequency.
A virtual distributed actor system could potentially be used to address any potential downtime or resource waste created by unpopulated zones.
I've been playing around with some of these ideas but haven't been able to turn them into an actual implementation, so kudos to you for actually doing it!
- Jaxkr 5y agoThanks for your comment. Spatially allocated servers was my original implementation! There’s a link to a video demo in the blog post. You are definitely correct that spatial sharding is easier and more robust. This new approach was primarily made because I thought it would be fun and cool :P
- mbo 5y agoThis appears to be spatially allocated system that an acquaintance of mine worked on https://github.com/PureGero/MultiPaper https://github.com/PureGero/MultiPaper