On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 21:01:00 -0700 (PDT), Ann Otoole wrote:
> Whats the jira for this defect you say exists that I have never once observed
> despite always using a setting of 4?
I don't contribute to the JIRA any more: what's the point when LL
marks the issues as "will not finish" or just plain
ppens.
From: Henri Beauchamp
To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Sent: Sun, October 3, 2010 7:46:24 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Question about LOD debug setting
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 13:37:49 -0400, Ponzu wrote:
> I picked up a notecard that says to
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 13:37:49 -0400, Ponzu wrote:
> I picked up a notecard that says to increase RenderVolumeLODFactor to 4. Is
> this reasonable, do you think? And if so, why not increase the default a
> bit (currently seems to be 1.125
4 is OK for viewer v1.23.5. For Snowglobe (v1 and v2) and v
measure for people on
capped bandwidth plans. The entire concept of impact metrics needs to be
revisited and done right IMHO.
From: leliel
To: opensource-dev
Sent: Sun, October 3, 2010 2:54:36 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Question about LOD debug setting
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 2:54 PM, leliel wrote:
>
> > Unlike increasing your draw distance, this will NOT create lag for
> yourself
>
> This however, is blatantly false. If rendering everything at full
> detail all the time didn't cause a drop in frame rate than why would
> we even bother with LOD?
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Ponzu wrote:
> I picked up a notecard that says to increase RenderVolumeLODFactor to 4. Is
> this reasonable, do you think? And if so, why not increase the default a
> bit (currently seems to be 1.125
It is reasonable, the default setting is a bit low. It varies
I picked up a notecard that says to increase RenderVolumeLODFactor to 4. Is
this reasonable, do you think? And if so, why not increase the default a
bit (currently seems to be 1.125
lee
==notecard says===
well, its until they fix this lod problem, its just a workaround.
Debugging your LOD set
