Scaling of group messages is simple however. With one server per group you get a long way.
Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average. Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so you can keep adding groups to a server until the total number of group members is around 20,000. Then you add a server. The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS system, for example <hash-of-group-name>.groups.secondlife.com And if you throw a good socket library against it (not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000 users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise. Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server and they can tell you how to do that. On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote: > IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K > people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people > end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if > you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a > quite heavy loaded system. > > Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple > conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting > 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. -- Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
