MOSES patch submitted

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
36 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

MOSES patch submitted

Michael Heilmann
Opensim Devs

Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project
MOSES.  Thanks.

--
Michael Heilmann
Research Associate
Institute for Simulation and Training
University of Central Florida

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted

Michael Emory Cerquoni
please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing, thanks guys!

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
Opensim Devs

Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project MOSES.  Thanks.

--
Michael Heilmann
Research Associate
Institute for Simulation and Training
University of Central Florida

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should still
apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this done -
let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.

v/r -douglas

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
Cerquoni
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted

please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing, thanks
guys!


On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
wrote:


        Opensim Devs

        Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project
MOSES.  Thanks.

        --
        Michael Heilmann
        Research Associate
        Institute for Simulation and Training
        University of Central Florida

        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [hidden email]
        http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev 
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>





--

Michael Emory Cerquoni

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

smime.p7s (7K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should still
apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this done -
let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.

v/r -douglas

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
Cerquoni
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted

please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing, thanks
guys!


On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
wrote:


        Opensim Devs

        Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project
MOSES.  Thanks.

        --
        Michael Heilmann
        Research Associate
        Institute for Simulation and Training
        University of Central Florida

        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [hidden email]
        http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>





--

Michael Emory Cerquoni

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region, we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the project as a whole.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should still
apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this done -
let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.

v/r -douglas

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
Cerquoni
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted

please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing, thanks
guys!


On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
wrote:


        Opensim Devs

        Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project
MOSES.  Thanks.

        --
        Michael Heilmann
        Research Associate
        Institute for Simulation and Training
        University of Central Florida

        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [hidden email]
        http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>





--

Michael Emory Cerquoni

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
I have to admit I am a bit bewildered at this patch, what is the actual benefit of reporting the actual numbers if it has the potential to break so much?  Can we rethink this and have this be a variable that can be configured for different applications, I really hate the idea of forcing this change on everyone without much better ability to explain why this is so important, having it just go from 55fps to 11fps is going to freak people out and cause a lot of problems for the core development support teams.  To me it makes more sense to make the multiplication factor configurable so that if a certain grid wants to run at normal stats they can set the modifier to 1.0 if a certain grid wants to be an analogue of second life they can change the modifier to 5.0, but if forcing everyone to use this is the only option I have to say my vote is -1 for inclusion at this point, unless someone can really convince me why this is so important otherwise.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region, we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the project as a whole.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should still
apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this done -
let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.

v/r -douglas

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
Cerquoni
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted

please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing, thanks
guys!


On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
wrote:


        Opensim Devs

        Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from project
MOSES.  Thanks.

        --
        Michael Heilmann
        Research Associate
        Institute for Simulation and Training
        University of Central Florida

        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [hidden email]
        http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>





--

Michael Emory Cerquoni

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Melanie-2
In reply to this post by Michael Emory Cerquoni
It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:

> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.  

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) (407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:

> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) (407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Mike Chase
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike

On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) (407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) (407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Dahlia Trimble
I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Diva Canto
I'm +1 on the changes. I find it very unsettling to be shown a physics fps that is incorrect, and some of my students have been very confused about it in the past. I don't think the changes will affect bots in any significant way, but if someone can point me to a bot that will be affected, I would like to know.

On 4/24/2015 6:23 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Michael Emory Cerquoni
It is more than just bots that worry me, many people have written custom monitoring tools to monitor region performance to automatically restart regions, not to mention script that could potentially rely on osGetRegionStats > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OsGetRegionStats   we could be potentially breaking all of this content if we are talking about long term leaving the statistics at these lower numbers, if we are talking about eventually having them resume to the normal levels etc.. that is something else, and if that is the case I would suggest we start a new branch for that work that would eventually merge into master once the work was complete.  Like i said I am not against doing this work, but not at the expense of causing mass chaos amongst important users and testers of this software, how can we say we are improving the software if we are rushing into breaking stuff people may be very reliant on.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Diva Canto <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm +1 on the changes. I find it very unsettling to be shown a physics fps that is incorrect, and some of my students have been very confused about it in the past. I don't think the changes will affect bots in any significant way, but if someone can point me to a bot that will be affected, I would like to know.


On 4/24/2015 6:23 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

James Hughes
Hi All,

I'm not sure what the historical reasons are for using the multipliers.
If we are sure it's not affecting viewer functions then we only need to
worry about automated monitoring systems, etc. that depend on current
values. Although we try our best to keep the platform stable, we do make
breaking changes from time to time to improve the useability. These
changes would be brought into master, giving most users ample time to
make adjustments. Those running master for testing and development can
expect infrequent breaking changes and make adjustments in their
applications.

If these changes move us forward and allow better monitoring, then I'm
+1 for changing them.

-BlueWall

On Sat, 2015-04-25 at 00:08 -0400, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:

> It is more than just bots that worry me, many people have written
> custom monitoring tools to monitor region performance to automatically
> restart regions, not to mention script that could potentially rely on
> osGetRegionStats > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OsGetRegionStats   we
> could be potentially breaking all of this content if we are talking
> about long term leaving the statistics at these lower numbers, if we
> are talking about eventually having them resume to the normal levels
> etc.. that is something else, and if that is the case I would suggest
> we start a new branch for that work that would eventually merge into
> master once the work was complete.  Like i said I am not against doing
> this work, but not at the expense of causing mass chaos amongst
> important users and testers of this software, how can we say we are
> improving the software if we are rushing into breaking stuff people
> may be very reliant on.
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Diva Canto <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>         I'm +1 on the changes. I find it very unsettling to be shown a
>         physics fps that is incorrect, and some of my students have
>         been very confused about it in the past. I don't think the
>         changes will affect bots in any significant way, but if
>         someone can point me to a bot that will be affected, I would
>         like to know.
>        
>        
>         On 4/24/2015 6:23 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
>        
>         > I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I
>         > see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is
>         > linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also
>         > scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps
>         > reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5,
>         > all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the
>         > 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It
>         > really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the
>         > same indication of change in performance.
>         >
>         >
>         > As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps
>         > of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case
>         > if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11
>         > or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.
>         >
>         > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni
>         > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>         >         Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If
>         >         the goal is to improve performance in general I am
>         >         not sure it matters what is actually reported to the
>         >         viewer , since i would assume any kind of real
>         >         analysis would be done on the back end and not via
>         >         the viewer #'s
>         >        
>         >        
>         >         On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase
>         >         <[hidden email]> wrote:
>         >                 Why not just introduce a new counter and
>         >                 function to fetch the value.  The current
>         >                 one can always return the SL adjusted value.
>         >                
>         >                 Mike
>         >                
>         >                
>         >                 On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory
>         >                 Cerquoni wrote:
>         >                
>         >                 > What do you think about making the
>         >                 > multiplier a modifiable variable in
>         >                 > OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who
>         >                 > wants to improve performance and use the
>         >                 > stock #'s and in the meantime people can
>         >                 > continue to use the code in a meaningful
>         >                 > way without having to rewrite scripts and
>         >                 > monitoring tools to continue testing other
>         >                 > code that may be pushed into core,
>         >                 > especially if the end goal is to get
>         >                 > statistics to report back at the original
>         >                 > numbers?  I am mostly just trying to
>         >                 > understand the end goal myself.  If that
>         >                 > is not possible I would suggest this work
>         >                 > be moved into a development branch until
>         >                 > we can get statistics back to the normal
>         >                 > numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking
>         >                 > about locking the code down to all other
>         >                 > development until this process is
>         >                 > complete, and no one has discussed any
>         >                 > kind of time frame for this level of
>         >                 > changes to complete, I would hate to put a
>         >                 > complete halt to development in order for
>         >                 > this to happen.  I am not against doing
>         >                 > what you suggest, I just want to make sure
>         >                 > we do it in the most efficient way
>         >                 > possible.  Would be good to hear what
>         >                 > others in the core development have to
>         >                 > say, hopefully Justin and Diva and
>         >                 > Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys
>         >                 > can chime in here as well, as I am only
>         >                 > one person here and for the record just
>         >                 > voicing my own concerns, I am far from the
>         >                 > final say on any of this stuff.
>         >                 >
>         >                 >
>         >                 > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell,
>         >                 > Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US)
>         >                 > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>         >                 >         Folks, before we can make any
>         >                 >         meaningful progress in performance
>         >                 >         enhancements to the open simulator
>         >                 >         we have to be able to rely on the
>         >                 >         simulator statistics.  Currently
>         >                 >         they are (purposefully)
>         >                 >         misreported to make the simulator
>         >                 >         look like it is performing better
>         >                 >         than it really is.  This is not
>         >                 >         acceptable if we are to dig in and
>         >                 >         begin to assist.
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >         Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>         >                 >         Science and Technology Manager
>         >                 >         Virtual World Strategic
>         >                 >         Applications
>         >                 >         U.S. Army Research Lab
>         >                 >         Human Research & Engineering
>         >                 >         Directorate
>         >                 >         Simulation & Training Technology
>         >                 >         Center
>         >                 >         (c) (407) 242-0209
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >         ________________________________________
>         >                 >         From:
>         >                 >         [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
>         >                 >         Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56
>         >                 >         PM
>         >                 >         To: [hidden email]
>         >                 >         Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES
>         >                 >         patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >         It is also my opinion that this
>         >                 >         change isn't fit for core. If and
>         >                 >         when additional stats, like "real
>         >                 >         fps" and "physics engine fps" can
>         >                 >         be shown in the viewer, then that
>         >                 >         would be good but the viewer stats
>         >                 >         window should continue to show the
>         >                 >         fudged figures indefinitely. This
>         >                 >         is because people don't only use
>         >                 >         scripts but also bots to do
>         >                 >         monitoring and bots receive the
>         >                 >         same data the viewer receives.
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >         - Melanie
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >         On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory
>         >                 >         Cerquoni wrote:
>         >                 >         > ok so just so I understand we
>         >                 >         should now see this actually just
>         >                 >         display
>         >                 >         > 11fps? Personally I think this
>         >                 >         is a bad idea, alot of people may
>         >                 >         be using
>         >                 >         > monitoring apps and scripts that
>         >                 >         look for low fps and restart the
>         >                 >         region,
>         >                 >         > we would basically be forcing
>         >                 >         everyone to rewrite a lot of code
>         >                 >         to
>         >                 >         > accommodate a singular purpose?
>         >                 >         Not quite sure how this improves
>         >                 >         the
>         >                 >         > project as a whole.
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM,
>         >                 >         Michael Emory Cerquoni <
>         >                 >         > [hidden email]> wrote:
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >> ok I will continue testing this
>         >                 >         for now, we should try to resolve
>         >                 >         the
>         >                 >         >> white space issues before it
>         >                 >         hits core, we can worry about that
>         >                 >         later
>         >                 >         >> though. I hope others can start
>         >                 >         testing this patch as well we need
>         >                 >         to
>         >                 >         >> really make sure this does not
>         >                 >         break any scripts or monitoring
>         >                 >         apps before
>         >                 >         >> this changes the core code, so
>         >                 >         anyone who has the time please do
>         >                 >         test this
>         >                 >         >> and let us know if you notice
>         >                 >         anything change or break, thanks!
>         >                 >         >>
>         >                 >         >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38
>         >                 >         PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY
>         >                 >         ARL (US) <
>         >                 >         >> [hidden email]>
>         >                 >         wrote:
>         >                 >         >>
>         >                 >         >>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>         >                 >         >>> Caveats: NONE
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> What you saw were just
>         >                 >         warnings about white spaces.  The
>         >                 >         patch should
>         >                 >         >>> still
>         >                 >         >>> apply and work.  We follows
>         >                 >         the open simulator patch creation
>         >                 >         guidance
>         >                 >         >>> explicitly, if you guys have
>         >                 >         updated instructions for how you
>         >                 >         want this
>         >                 >         >>> done -
>         >                 >         >>> let us know.  Otherwise, you
>         >                 >         can ignore the warnings.
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> v/r -douglas
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>         >                 >         >>> Science and Technology Manager
>         >                 >         >>> Virtual World Strategic
>         >                 >         Applications
>         >                 >         >>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>         >                 >         >>> Simulation & Training
>         >                 >         Technology Center (STTC)
>         >                 >         >>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> -----Original Message-----
>         >                 >         >>> From:
>         >                 >         [hidden email]
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>         >                 >         >>> Cerquoni
>         >                 >         >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015
>         >                 >         2:38 PM
>         >                 >         >>> To:
>         >                 >         [hidden email]
>         >                 >         >>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev]
>         >                 >         MOSES patch submitted
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> please check the mantis, i had
>         >                 >         some trouble applying patch for
>         >                 >         testing,
>         >                 >         >>> thanks
>         >                 >         >>> guys!
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30
>         >                 >         PM, Michael Heilmann
>         >                 >         <[hidden email]>
>         >                 >         >>> wrote:
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>         Opensim Devs
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>         Just an FYI, mantis
>         >                 >         bug #7540 is the first code
>         >                 >         submission from
>         >                 >         >>> project
>         >                 >         >>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>         --
>         >                 >         >>>         Michael Heilmann
>         >                 >         >>>         Research Associate
>         >                 >         >>>         Institute for
>         >                 >         Simulation and Training
>         >                 >         >>>         University of Central
>         >                 >         Florida
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >          _______________________________________________
>         >                 >         >>>         Opensim-dev mailing
>         >                 >         list
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >          [hidden email]
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >          http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> --
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>         >                 >         >>> Caveats: NONE
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         _______________________________________________
>         >                 >         >>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 >         >>> [hidden email]
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>>
>         >                 >         >>
>         >                 >         >>
>         >                 >         >> --
>         >                 >         >> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>         >                 >         >>
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         _______________________________________________
>         >                 >         > Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 >         > [hidden email]
>         >                 >         >
>         >                 >         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                 >         _______________________________________________
>         >                 >         Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 >         [hidden email]
>         >                 >         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                 >         _______________________________________________
>         >                 >         Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 >         [hidden email]
>         >                 >         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                 >        
>         >                 >
>         >                 >
>         >                 >
>         >                 > --
>         >                 > Michael Emory Cerquoni
>         >                 >
>         >                 >
>         >                 > _______________________________________________
>         >                 > Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 > [hidden email]
>         >                 > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                
>         >                
>         >                
>         >                 _______________________________________________
>         >                 Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >                 [hidden email]
>         >                 http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >                
>         >        
>         >        
>         >        
>         >         --
>         >         Michael Emory Cerquoni
>         >        
>         >         _______________________________________________
>         >         Opensim-dev mailing list
>         >         [hidden email]
>         >         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>         >        
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Opensim-dev mailing list
>         > [hidden email]
>         > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>        
>        
>        
>         _______________________________________________
>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>         [hidden email]
>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>        
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Emory Cerquoni
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Tom Bess
In reply to this post by Dahlia Trimble
Sorry to have been so naive but I had accepted the values as true and was using them within my PhD thesis. I am sure I am not the only one who accepted this metric on face value. I am not certain in the .ini solutution will work as this will then vary from virtual world to virtual world so it will neither no what units they were reporting in and for scripts potentially having to change them according to the OpenSim environment.  I suggest make the metrics accurate.


Tom Willans  BSc(Hons)  MBCS  CITP
PhD Student
Serious Games Institute, Coventry University
United Kingdom

Managing Director Bessacarr Publications Ltd
+44 (0)121 288 0281
skype: tom.willans
Second Life and OSGrid: Tom Tiros

Support fundraising for Epilepsy and see the film 'Electricity' <a href="x-apple-data-detectors://1" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="calendar-event" x-apple-data-detectors-result="1" style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;">on 19th May 2015 7.30pm at Square One Cinema, Coventry Student Hub. Details and Booking at covepilepsyfunding.ticketsource.co.uk. All profits donated. Any questions please contact me.


Sent from my iPad

On 25 Apr 2015, at 02:23, Dahlia Trimble <[hidden email]> wrote:

I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US)
In reply to this post by Michael Emory Cerquoni

Good design principles reduce complexity while maintaining or increasing functionality.  I am not in support of the idea of introducing multiplier variables into the ini file.  This is for a number of reasons, one being there are a large number of multiplier variables that could be needed and the ini file is already complicated enough.  Adding more variables and code, rather than fixing bad code is not a responsible solution.

 

This is a gut-check opportunity for the devs.  At some point in the past, somebody made the decision to artificially inflate these numbers and now (years later), that mistake has caught up with us.  The longer you wait, the more painful the correction will be.  It should be corrected, and any monitoring tools updated.  It is the responsible course of action. 

 

We are attempting to help you by addressing physics and networking issues within the Open Simulator.  Step Zero of this process is trusting the simulator statistics. 

 

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a tabindex="0" style="WHITE-SPACE: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; COLOR: rgb(17,85,204); FONT: 13px arial,sans-serif; LETTER-SPACING: normal; BACKGROUND-COLOR: rgb(255,255,255); TEXT-INDENT: 0px" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" target="" value="&#43;14072420209">(407) 242-0209

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Michael Emory Cerquoni [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 8:59 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <douglas.maxwell3.civ@...> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) (407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: opensim-dev-bounces@... [opensim-dev-bounces@...] on behalf of Melanie [melanie@...]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: opensim-dev@...
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> nebadon2025@...> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> douglas.maxwell3.civ@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) (407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: opensim-dev-bounces@...
>>> [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: opensim-dev@...
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <mheilman@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         Opensim-dev@...
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> Opensim-dev@...
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev@...
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
Opensim-dev@...
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
Opensim-dev@...
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Dahlia Trimble
Hi Douglas,

We certainly appreciate your efforts to help us. OpenSimulator would hardly have had the success it's had without the help of many developers and users. As core developers, we bear responsibility to all users and contributors to make sure all get as much benefit from the efforts of the community as possible. Unfortunately we sometimes fail in this regard. Many decisions are not simple and easy to make. There are literally many thousands of users of OpenSimulator and we try to do what we can to make their applications work. When we fail, sometimes forks occur. This is not generally considered a bad thing; often forks bring about different perspectives and useful innovations and improvements. We also need to consider how contributions can be supported after the contributor(s) have moved on. Sometimes we are successful at maintaining many of the more desirable features; some will go stale and eventually be removed. So I hope you can understand why there is some hesitation among some of the core team about accepting patches which might interfere with existing functionality and content. We're not singling you out; this happens with most contributions. We have to use our judgement in each case and this can unfortunately appear arbitrary or capricious to contributors. Hopefully the end result is an improved OpenSimulator for as many users as possible and not just for a few.

Personally I have no objection to the statistics modifications as I understand them, which I admit is unfortunately not very well yet as I have not had time to review the patches. I will likely be relying on the efforts and opinions of other developers and users unless I see things getting out of hand.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:

Good design principles reduce complexity while maintaining or increasing functionality.  I am not in support of the idea of introducing multiplier variables into the ini file.  This is for a number of reasons, one being there are a large number of multiplier variables that could be needed and the ini file is already complicated enough.  Adding more variables and code, rather than fixing bad code is not a responsible solution.

 

This is a gut-check opportunity for the devs.  At some point in the past, somebody made the decision to artificially inflate these numbers and now (years later), that mistake has caught up with us.  The longer you wait, the more painful the correction will be.  It should be corrected, and any monitoring tools updated.  It is the responsible course of action. 

 

We are attempting to help you by addressing physics and networking issues within the Open Simulator.  Step Zero of this process is trusting the simulator statistics. 

 

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a style="WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;COLOR:rgb(17,85,204);FONT:13px arial,sans-serif;LETTER-SPACING:normal;BACKGROUND-COLOR:rgb(255,255,255);TEXT-INDENT:0px" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Michael Emory Cerquoni [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 8:59 PM

To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <douglas.maxwell3.civ@...> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: opensim-dev-bounces@... [opensim-dev-bounces@...] on behalf of Melanie [melanie@...]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: opensim-dev@...
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> nebadon2025@...> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> douglas.maxwell3.civ@...> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: opensim-dev-bounces@...
>>> [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: opensim-dev@...
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <mheilman@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         Opensim-dev@...
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> Opensim-dev@...
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev@...
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
Opensim-dev@...
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
Opensim-dev@...
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Diva Canto
In reply to this post by Michael Emory Cerquoni
I would like to hear from people who have either monitoring tools or bots that rely on the incorrect physics FPS. If these people exist, let's hear what pain it would cause them to correct the number. Otherwise, I don't see any reason to continue to report  an incorrect number, and I see many reasons for fixing it: several PhD students have now either wasted a lot of their time or even made wrong data analysis because of this.


On 4/24/2015 9:08 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
It is more than just bots that worry me, many people have written custom monitoring tools to monitor region performance to automatically restart regions, not to mention script that could potentially rely on osGetRegionStats > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OsGetRegionStats   we could be potentially breaking all of this content if we are talking about long term leaving the statistics at these lower numbers, if we are talking about eventually having them resume to the normal levels etc.. that is something else, and if that is the case I would suggest we start a new branch for that work that would eventually merge into master once the work was complete.  Like i said I am not against doing this work, but not at the expense of causing mass chaos amongst important users and testers of this software, how can we say we are improving the software if we are rushing into breaking stuff people may be very reliant on.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Diva Canto <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm +1 on the changes. I find it very unsettling to be shown a physics fps that is incorrect, and some of my students have been very confused about it in the past. I don't think the changes will affect bots in any significant way, but if someone can point me to a bot that will be affected, I would like to know.


On 4/24/2015 6:23 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

Frank Nichols
That is an excellent question. Rather than assuming a major impact, it would be good if there was some way to actually find out. In my case the impact amounts to a couple literals defined at the top of my monitoring program.

I cant speak for others. 

Frank

Sent from my iPad Air 2

On Apr 25, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Diva Canto <[hidden email]> wrote:

I would like to hear from people who have either monitoring tools or bots that rely on the incorrect physics FPS. If these people exist, let's hear what pain it would cause them to correct the number. Otherwise, I don't see any reason to continue to report  an incorrect number, and I see many reasons for fixing it: several PhD students have now either wasted a lot of their time or even made wrong data analysis because of this.


On 4/24/2015 9:08 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
It is more than just bots that worry me, many people have written custom monitoring tools to monitor region performance to automatically restart regions, not to mention script that could potentially rely on osGetRegionStats > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OsGetRegionStats   we could be potentially breaking all of this content if we are talking about long term leaving the statistics at these lower numbers, if we are talking about eventually having them resume to the normal levels etc.. that is something else, and if that is the case I would suggest we start a new branch for that work that would eventually merge into master once the work was complete.  Like i said I am not against doing this work, but not at the expense of causing mass chaos amongst important users and testers of this software, how can we say we are improving the software if we are rushing into breaking stuff people may be very reliant on.

On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Diva Canto <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm +1 on the changes. I find it very unsettling to be shown a physics fps that is incorrect, and some of my students have been very confused about it in the past. I don't think the changes will affect bots in any significant way, but if someone can point me to a bot that will be affected, I would like to know.


On 4/24/2015 6:23 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
I like the idea of a multiplier for physics fps, however I see no need for altering the value. If a reported number is linearly scaled, then any change in that number is also scaled proportionally. For example, if I have 55 fps reported for a real fps of 11 due to a scale factor of 5, all I need to do is divide by 5 to get the 11 back. If the 55 decreases by 10%, the 11 will also decrease by 10%. It really shouldn't matter as either value will provide the same indication of change in performance.

As far as SL compatibility goes, I usually see a physics fps of 45 for a well running region in SL, not 55. In that case if such compatibility was desired, the factor would be 45/11 or approximately 4.1 rather than 5.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <[hidden email]> wrote:
Also sounds like a reasonable solution as well, If the goal is to improve performance in general I am not sure it matters what is actually reported to the viewer , since i would assume any kind of real analysis would be done on the back end and not via the viewer #'s

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Mike Chase <[hidden email]> wrote:
Why not just introduce a new counter and function to fetch the value.  The current one can always return the SL adjusted value.

Mike


On 04/24/2015 08:59 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
What do you think about making the multiplier a modifiable variable in OpenSim.ini?  This will allow anyone who wants to improve performance and use the stock #'s and in the meantime people can continue to use the code in a meaningful way without having to rewrite scripts and monitoring tools to continue testing other code that may be pushed into core, especially if the end goal is to get statistics to report back at the original numbers?  I am mostly just trying to understand the end goal myself.  If that is not possible I would suggest this work be moved into a development branch until we can get statistics back to the normal numbers again?  Otherwise we are talking about locking the code down to all other development until this process is complete, and no one has discussed any kind of time frame for this level of changes to complete, I would hate to put a complete halt to development in order for this to happen.  I am not against doing what you suggest, I just want to make sure we do it in the most efficient way possible.  Would be good to hear what others in the core development have to say, hopefully Justin and Diva and Melanie, Misterblue, BlueWall, you guys can chime in here as well, as I am only one person here and for the record just voicing my own concerns, I am far from the final say on any of this stuff.

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Folks, before we can make any meaningful progress in performance enhancements to the open simulator we have to be able to rely on the simulator statistics.  Currently they are (purposefully) misreported to make the simulator look like it is performing better than it really is.  This is not acceptable if we are to dig in and begin to assist.

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Human Research & Engineering Directorate
Simulation & Training Technology Center
(c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209

________________________________________
From: [hidden email] [[hidden email]] on behalf of Melanie [[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 5:56 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted (UNCLASSIFIED)

It is also my opinion that this change isn't fit for core. If and
when additional stats, like "real fps" and "physics engine fps" can
be shown in the viewer, then that would be good but the viewer stats
window should continue to show the fudged figures indefinitely. This
is because people don't only use scripts but also bots to do
monitoring and bots receive the same data the viewer receives.

- Melanie

On 24/04/2015 23:42, Michael Emory Cerquoni wrote:
> ok so just so I understand we should now see this actually just display
> 11fps? Personally I think this is a bad idea, alot of people may be using
> monitoring apps and scripts that look for low fps and restart the region,
> we would basically be forcing everyone to rewrite a lot of code to
> accommodate a singular purpose? Not quite sure how this improves the
> project as a whole.
>
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> ok I will continue testing this for now, we should try to resolve the
>> white space issues before it hits core, we can worry about that later
>> though. I hope others can start testing this patch as well we need to
>> really make sure this does not break any scripts or monitoring apps before
>> this changes the core code, so anyone who has the time please do test this
>> and let us know if you notice anything change or break, thanks!
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>> What you saw were just warnings about white spaces.  The patch should
>>> still
>>> apply and work.  We follows the open simulator patch creation guidance
>>> explicitly, if you guys have updated instructions for how you want this
>>> done -
>>> let us know.  Otherwise, you can ignore the warnings.
>>>
>>> v/r -douglas
>>>
>>> Douglas Maxwell, MSME
>>> Science and Technology Manager
>>> Virtual World Strategic Applications
>>> U.S. Army Research Lab
>>> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>>> (c) <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:%28407%29%20242-0209" value="+14072420209" target="_blank">(407) 242-0209
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Emory
>>> Cerquoni
>>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 2:38 PM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] MOSES patch submitted
>>>
>>> please check the mantis, i had some trouble applying patch for testing,
>>> thanks
>>> guys!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Michael Heilmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>         Opensim Devs
>>>
>>>         Just an FYI, mantis bug #7540 is the first code submission from
>>> project
>>> MOSES.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>         --
>>>         Michael Heilmann
>>>         Research Associate
>>>         Institute for Simulation and Training
>>>         University of Central Florida
>>>
>>>         _______________________________________________
>>>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>>>         [hidden email]
>>>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>> <blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>>
>>> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>>> Caveats: NONE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev



--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev




--
Michael Emory Cerquoni


_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
12