[Opensim-dev] Splitting IUserService

[liu xiaolu]

plus 10000000

feel exciting to hear about this



2008/6/28, Michael Wright <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk>:
> Does anyone have any objections to splitting the IUserService interface, so
> that the Avatar Appearance and attachments are in their own interface
> IAvatarService ?
>
> I really don't think we should be coupling things like we are. I'm not
> saying that these functions have to move off the User Server. Just on the
> region side, we move them into their own interface, so that if someone wants
> those functions to be on a different server, they can change the url of the
> server to be different to the user server with minor code changes.
>
> When I think about the various Servers, I generally think of the User server
> as holding account infomation. The Grid Server as being the general manager
> of the "grid". And the Inventory and Asset servers as the general
> datastores.
>
> So to fit in with my view, the avatar appearance data would fit better on
> the Inventory server or even a separate server that was part of the
> datastore group. This is so that we could have one central User Server, but
> a number of Inventory and Asset servers. Each user's in-world data could be
> on a different set of those.
>
> As I've said before, I really think we should have a system that allows the
> various backend functions to be where ever a grid admin thinks is best. But
> thats still a dream.
>
> But we can do a small change that would allow a different url to be set for
> the Avatar services, if a application required it.
>
> So what I'm suggesting is we add a new interface to the
> CommunicationsManager, like:
>
> public Interface IAvatarService
> {
>         AvatarAppearance GetUserAppearance(LLUUID user);
>
>         void UpdateUserAppearance(LLUUID user, AvatarAppearance appearance);
>
>         void AddAttachment(LLUUID user, LLUUID attach);
>
>         void RemoveAttachment(LLUUID user, LLUUID attach);
>
>         List<LLUUID> GetAttachments(LLUUID user);
> }
>
> The OSGrid implementation could be exactly like it is now, and send the
> requests to the user server. I'm not even talking about adding a new setting
> to the ini file, but just leaving the code so it uses the UserServer url.
>
> So its really a minor change, but does decouple these functions from the
> more general user account functions.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>  Not happy with your email address?
>   Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available
> now at  Yahoo!


-- 
Lulurun