3 ms·

How would that work here? "Load" is players finishing games and requiring new match pairings / rating updates for the tournament to continue. You can tell them

How would that work here? "Load" is players finishing games and requiring new match pairings / rating updates for the tournament to continue. You can tell them to wait, sure. But as long as the rate of games finishing exceeds the rate at which they can process them I don't see how that would improve the situation, the tournament would be stuck anyway. One option is to eg. limit the total number of players in the tournament up front but they explicitly said they didn't want to do that.

bcrosby95 5y ago
Depends upon of every event is strictly necessary for the proper functioning of the system, or if some are just nice-to-have.
- jeremyjh 5y ago
  This is where it helps to have domain knowledge before pontificating on someone else's architecture. It is an arena tournament. If you want people to join the tournament and get paired with games after finishing their current game you'll need those events. There are no "nice to haves".
  - than3 5y ago
    > There are no 'nice to haves' That's an assumption, there's a lot of assumptions flying around right now. The simple answer is we don't know. Often there are a lot of design tradeoffs, bcrosby was likely questioning whether all events going into that specific queue were strictly necessary for matchmaking. We don't even know that this was actually the problem. So far, no professional post-mortem, or root cause analysis has been released. There are certainly ways one can setup these type of services so they dynamically scale correctly, but since the architecture they are using isn't fully disclosed its difficult to say anything with certainty and this type of guesswork is entirely unproductive.
- zaptheimpaler 5y ago
  lol are you all just repeating scaling buzzwords? back-pressure, load shedding, whats next horizontal scaling or maybe blockchain?
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    Web scale sharding.
    - zaptheimpaler 5y ago
      Web 3 POINT OH blockchain though none of that 2.0 nonsense for me
- tux1968 5y ago
  This particular tournament was being played for bitcoin valued at almost 50k. It would be nice for everyone to have a fair shot at it without the system getting in the way.

bcrosby95 5y ago

Depends upon of every event is strictly necessary for the proper functioning of the system, or if some are just nice-to-have.

jeremyjh 5y ago
This is where it helps to have domain knowledge before pontificating on someone else's architecture. It is an arena tournament. If you want people to join the tournament and get paired with games after finishing their current game you'll need those events. There are no "nice to haves".
- than3 5y ago
  > There are no 'nice to haves' That's an assumption, there's a lot of assumptions flying around right now. The simple answer is we don't know. Often there are a lot of design tradeoffs, bcrosby was likely questioning whether all events going into that specific queue were strictly necessary for matchmaking. We don't even know that this was actually the problem. So far, no professional post-mortem, or root cause analysis has been released. There are certainly ways one can setup these type of services so they dynamically scale correctly, but since the architecture they are using isn't fully disclosed its difficult to say anything with certainty and this type of guesswork is entirely unproductive.
zaptheimpaler 5y ago
lol are you all just repeating scaling buzzwords? back-pressure, load shedding, whats next horizontal scaling or maybe blockchain?
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  Web scale sharding.
  - zaptheimpaler 5y ago
    Web 3 POINT OH blockchain though none of that 2.0 nonsense for me
tux1968 5y ago
This particular tournament was being played for bitcoin valued at almost 50k. It would be nice for everyone to have a fair shot at it without the system getting in the way.