[Opensim-dev] [Opensim-users] grid operation

Thu Dec 11 13:43:13 UTC 2008

I'm definately +1 on keeping standalone mode.
It's that troublesome grid mode that really has to go!   haha.  Just
kidding on that second part.

Yeah, really, I never understood why a few people want to remove it.
It's a fast, convenient and free way to get a grid-in-a-box.     You
can make your cake and eat it too.

Best Regards

Teravus

On 12/11/08, Michael Wright <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Corrected Version with some spelling mistakes fixed and other small changes.
>
> I agree, and if we make the code and interface more shared between
> standalone mode and the Grid servers, then all the Grid server app have to
> be is minimum wrappers around the base classes. With them basically just
> registering http handlers.
>
> This allows there to a gradient between full standalone mode and full Grid
> mode. Different application are going to require different levels of
> functions and embedded services.
>
> With one application maybe requiring a embedded Grid and User server in the
> single instance but using external Inventory and Asset servers. And these
> Inventory/asset servers could be shared with other applications/grids.
>
> Also I think future work on hyper grid could improve these sort of
> applications. Allowing applications that require minimum separate backend
> support, but being part of a bigger hyper grid.
>
> There are so many different applications/ case uses that we haven't really
> even started to think about yet, that I think it would be a massive mistake
> to make the distributed grid servers we have now, the only way of using
> Opensim.
>
>
> Michael Wright <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I agree, and if we make the code and interface more shared between
> standalone mode and the Grid servers, then all the Grid server app have to
> be is minimum wrappers around the base classes. With them basically just
> requesting http handlers.
>
> This allows there to a gradient between full standalone mode and full Grid
> mode. Different application are going to require different levels of
> functions and embedding.
>
> With one application maybe requiring a embedded Grid and User server in the
> single instance but using external Inventory and Asset servers. And these
> Inventory/asset servers maybe could be shared with other applications/grids.
>
> Also I think future work on hyper grid can improve these sort of
> applications. Applications requiring minimum backend support but being part
> of a bigger hyper grid.
>
> There are so many different applications/ case uses that we haven't really
> even started to think about yet, that I think it would be a massic mistake
> to make the distributed grid servers we have now the only way of using
> Opensim.
>
>
> "Kyle \"G\"" <create at reactiongrid.com> wrote:
>
> I have some ideas for embedded, disconnected apps, mobile in nature which
> require a small embeddable DB and minimal footprint from OpenSim.  For this
> reason we feel standalone mode is important and needed but for the majority
> of what we plan in 2009 HyperGrid is a revolution we are really happy to see
> as we would  love to be part of a bigger community of similar OpenSim grids.
>
> Kyle G
> www.reactiongrid.com
>
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de
> [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of
> Michael Wright
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:37 AM
> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [Opensim-users] grid operation
>
> -1, I think standalone mode is a important feature, and will become more
> important in the future
>
>  I do think though, that we can do a lot more to cut down the code paths and
> make the grid services share code and interfaces better with standalone mode
>
> Ryan McDougall <sempuki1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> belated +1
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 7:52 PM, Hurliman, John wrote:
> > It seems to me that standalone mode could easily be replaced with a small
> C# app that launches all of the grid services with the proper configuration.
> This would reduce a lot of code paths.
> >
> > John
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de
> [mailto:opensim-dev-
> >> bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Stefan Andersson
> >> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 2:40 AM
> >> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de; opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
> >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [Opensim-users] grid operation
> >>
> >> Kyle,
> >>
> >>> I'm going to claim utter and absolute selfishness here and state that
> >>> I cannot see any situation under which I would have only 1 location
> >>> open in the 3D web.
> >>
> >> But others can and do - especially the out-of-the-box noob or the app
> >> dev just wanting to throw up a region to test a module.
> >>
> >>> For the purpose of "easily getting things set up", standalone is all
> >>> but useless in its initial state. It's certainly easier to get set
> >>> up, but it's also much more limited.
> >>
> >> It has one glorious use : letting people get an instant taste of
> >> OpenSim. That's probably what got us this far this fast.
> >>
> >>> Grid mode is perhaps a bit more difficult to set up -- but the
> >>> default in the configuration file is for the Null storage plugin to
> >>> be used under standalone mode. This makes things... difficult... when
> >>> trying to explain how to get modifications to the environment saved.
> >>
> >> For region persistence, it's SQLite, not Null?
> >>
> >>> Because
> >>> first, you have to explain how to configure the storage for the other
> >>> modules (again, for standalone).
> >>
> >> I must admit I'm a bit confused as of what resources you mean need
> >> configuration and extra set-up. Can you be more specific?
> >>
> >>> Also, I've been following the posts on the topic of the HyperGrid. I
> >>> need more information on this: will it work for any of the minigrids
> >>> to be in standalone mode when they try to connect with the HG? My gut
> >>> feeling says no... and my reason for promoting grid over standalone
> >>> is simply this: the HyperGrid is much closer to what the web is --
> >>> multiple administrative domains that all work together to pass
> >>> traffic between them. I don't view HG as being the final evolution,
> >>> but I do view it as being a very good start.
> >>
> >> Definitively - HG is a major step along the very lines we've been
> >> envisioning since the very beginning - when we first started using the
> >> phrase "3D Web". Let's not forget the "friendly teleports" region
> >> handle hacks of old. This is all building one step at a time, towards
> >> a golden future. The project has come a long way in only two years.
> >>
> >> And I'm pretty confident that there's even more magical stuff brewing
> >> on private hard drives and in corporate offices. :D
> >>
> >>> (And thank you, as always, for your time. :))
> >>
> >> And thank you for yours, Kyle!
> >>
> >> /Stefan
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>   No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.16/1842 - Release Date: 12/10/2008
> 6:53 PM_______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>