[Opensim-dev] Always mutable assets in OpenSim -- does it make sense?

[Stefan Andersson]

First step would probably be to implement the sha-based binary store that you bring up and that we've discussed earlier, so that the immutables at least share the same binary data row. Right now, I believe we're seing massive duplication when people export/import content between worlds. Storing the binaries separately by sha key would probably be an low hanging fruit.
I would say that it's probably very much up to the service (aka 'the grid') how assets should be managed. On an grid that employs a consumer/producer division (like a fantasy game) you could probably reap dead assets quite aggressively. In a SL business model, it becomes harder, as they have to ensure consistent user experience in a heterogenous environment.
 
Best regards,Stefan AnderssonTribal Media AB
> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:48:01 +0900> From: mmazur at gmail.com> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> Subject: [Opensim-dev] Always mutable assets in OpenSim -- does it make sense?> > Hi,> > Melanie's recent thread[1] on updating assets prompted me to put in> writing some thoughts on this topic I've been having.> > I'm curious whether it may be beneficial to make assets mutable. AFAIK> assets are currently immutable because of a LL decisions early on to> re-use one asset instance for very popular items sold no-modify. This> makes sense for them because they can:> > * clean up unused assets since they own the entire infrastructure> (regions & DBs)> * save on space because they anticipate more identical copies rather> than slightly modified copies> > Perhaps taking the opposite approach in OpenSim would be a better fit?> I mean, copying assets when they are transferred between owners, and> modifying them if they are modified in-world. I can see a few reasons> this might be beneficial:> > * OpenSim's databases are distributed so cleaning them (reaping dead> assets) is more difficult> * with the advent of distributed asset servers and the long-term> vision of a wide open 3D Internet (like HyperGrid), when an item is> transferred in-world its assets should probably be stored in that> avatar's own inventory DB *anyway*> * disk is cheap, and I wonder which is more wasteful -- multiple> copies of an asset, each differing slightly due to minor edits over> time, or multiple copies of identical assets because they correspond> to different objects in-world> > I see this as a cleaner approach to assets for the future. Sure,> storing duplicate identical assets in a DB can be wasteful, but this> could be alleviated with hashes of the asset or whatnot (I believe> this was brought up on this list before).> > I realize this change would mean deep, possibly breaking, changes> throughout the source code, would take a long time to hash out, etc. I> thought I'd throw it out there anyway.> > Your thoughts -- or perhaps clarifications on why this absolutely> cannot be done -- appreciated :)> > Thanks,> Mike> > [1] https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/opensim-dev/2008-December/004025.html> _______________________________________________> Opensim-dev mailing list> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20081217/3182fb98/attachment-0001.html>