Jump to content

groups


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3417 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts


Mouse Marenwolf wrote:

what i like to know is why can we not have more groups like we can only have 42 can we take it up to 50 what is the prob with that come on lets get it to 50 please 

Simple answer:  Server Load.

Complex answer:  Server Load.

And it used to be 25:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Tools-and-Technology/Technology-Improvements-for-Q1-Including-Raising-Group-Limit-to/ba-p/673513

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Perrie already answered you: server load.  You think raising it to 8 more groups.  But multiply that by the number of active residents and it is hundreds of thousands group members to keep track of.  Groups are borked now because they are overloaded.  Groups were never designed for what they are used for today.  They were designed for group ownership of land.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

50 would be nice, however...as of the writing of this, there are 51K+ residents on line. If each resident belongs to 42 group, that's hundreds of thousands of entries to manage. Notices are easy..they just go out to all members of the groups. Chat, however, requires the servers to locate who is online, first. Then it has to locate where they are and then send the message. If a group is big, like WoW with 35K with several hundred on line at any one time, even if they don't have the chat window open, or Builders Brewery with 25K + and multiply that for each group a person has, that's a lot of tracking to do along with everything else the sim servers have to do, like keeping track of where you are, running scripts, having to upload and then distribute sound clips from a gesture to everyone on the sim, even if they aren't in hearing range, etc,, even the best servers can get bogged down in the load. adding groups would add even more to the load.

If you look at a group...look at abilities for members. You will see that the vast majority of the group functions deal with land management, not social chat. They were never designed to handle being chat rooms. You talk to old time LL people and they will tell you that they never expected SL to become what it has.

I've been in SL long enough to remember when 35K people inworld crashed the entire grid. Now 35K is the low end, overnight numbers and we only had 10 groups. Didn't have all the business then that use the groups for distribution of store info. So, as nice as 50 groups would be, I don't know if we'll ever see it. It would be nice since almost half my groups are related to the RP sim I'm an admin in. I had to make a business alt to handle the extra groups I need to be in as a business owner for various hunts and business-related groups, which might be an alternative for you...an alt for the FYI groups that you don't need at your fingertips every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Mouse Marenwolf wrote:

i still like to know why can they not change it to 50 it would be better 

You don't seem to mind ignoring answers you've received so here's another:

It takes a lot of work to increase the limit from 42 to 50.  And then if they did that someone would immediately complain that it should be 75 instead of 50. 

Yes, there are people like that. 

Besides - the LL is busy building a new virtual thingy where they don't carry forward the mistakes of the past.  Maybe the new thingy won't have groups at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Pussycat Catnap wrote:

42 is such a bizzare number. If its a fandom joke - the joke was not funny.

In tech these things usually go as: 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, etc...

So we should be either 32 or 64. What happened to the other 22?

You don't like the Hitch Hikers Guide?  :catsurprised:

But actually, I can't find the quote now but it was said that was not the reason.  Originally it was going to be 40.  They felt that would be the max the servers could handle but at the last minute decided to push it just a little bit more.  It may be in one of the replies to the original blog post.

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Tools-and-Technology/Technology-Improvements-for-Q1-Including-Raising-Group-Limit-to/ba-p/673513#comments

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Pussycat Catnap wrote:

42 is such a bizzare number. If its a fandom joke - the joke was not funny.

In tech these things usually go as: 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, etc...

So we should be either 32 or 64. What happened to the other 22?

You don't like the Hitch Hikers Guide?  :catsurprised:

But actually, I can't find the quote now but it was said that was not the reason.  Originally it was going to be 40.  They felt that would be the max the servers could handle but at the last minute decided to push it just a little bit more.  It may be in one of the replies to the original blog post.


There was something in one of the Server Beta User Group sessions.

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Beta_Server_Office_Hours/Minutes/2010-12-16

The Hitchhikers Guide number was a coincidence :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3417 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...