OMG YES!!!! I want this =D
o/iMercurial wrote:
C'mon peppy, you can do it.
By this, do you mean it's hard to code, or it's difficult for the server to handle requests on that scale? If it's the former, then I guess it can't be helped, but if it's the latter, you could limit it so it doesn't load the server so badly, like have it update only once in a while (hourly?), or only be between mutual friends like ShadowLord suggested. Alternately, maybe you could tone down other features, like make only top 6 scores automatically upload a replay (I don't think a lot of people watch replays that aren't on the first page).peppy wrote:
I've always wanted to do this, but technically speaking this is a very hard (intensive) thing to handle.
In your dreams. osu! doesn't want to be associated with that kind of stuff.mmstick wrote:
It would also be nice if every beatmap had their own dedicated torrent link, possibly even have torrent functionality implemented inside Osu! I'd be willing to donate tons of bandwidth if this existed.
Why not? Are you implying there is some major flaw in the torrent protocol? If anything, it would drastically take the load off of the Osu servers, reducing bandwidth cost and needs. Give me a single good reason for why it would be a bad thing to be 'associated' with an Internet protocol like torrent.theowest wrote:
In your dreams. osu! doesn't want to be associated with that kind of stuff.mmstick wrote:
It would also be nice if every beatmap had their own dedicated torrent link, possibly even have torrent functionality implemented inside Osu! I'd be willing to donate tons of bandwidth if this existed.
Exactly. If you really want to see who your friends are, just remember who they are. They're already highlighted on the list and any friend beyond rank 40 won't show anyway.wmfchris wrote:
The problem is your "friends" may not want to show his/her score and this could end up with people watching random players' score by making friends with him/her. If the relationship is mutual and he/she is willing to disclose his/her score, you can simply ask him/her for the score/replay.
You need an index per-user per-beatmap ordered by score. As this information is obviously not stored in a single table, it means duplicating a lot of data, which all needs to be updated on a regular basis. Making this an efficient lookup is one of the most challenging query types for a database. It of course can be done, but requires a lot of optimisation, consideration and storage space.mmstick wrote:
I don't see how this would be intensive to implement, plenty of other games do this. One way would be to store all scores on a server, only keeping the highest score a user makes and the client simply grabs the data from the website database in real-time (similar to embedding a frame of a webpage). Another way would be for the clients to individually ask other clients for their highest local scores to sync with and promptly attempt to sync with friends clients when a new high score is obtained.
This is kind of confusing to me. Whatever confusing must be hard, right?peppy wrote:
I am hoping to address this in a round-about way in the future. For now, due to my previously mentioned reasons, it is not possible.You need an index per-user per-beatmap ordered by score. As this information is obviously not stored in a single table, it means duplicating a lot of data, which all needs to be updated on a regular basis. Making this an efficient lookup is one of the most challenging query types for a database. It of course can be done, but requires a lot of optimisation, consideration and storage space.mmstick wrote:
I don't see how this would be intensive to implement, plenty of other games do this. One way would be to store all scores on a server, only keeping the highest score a user makes and the client simply grabs the data from the website database in real-time (similar to embedding a frame of a webpage). Another way would be for the clients to individually ask other clients for their highest local scores to sync with and promptly attempt to sync with friends clients when a new high score is obtained.
Your solutions may sound simple to you, but aren't actually feasible due to over-simplication (suggestion 1) or incorrect approach (suggestion 2).
As would Iloseri wrote:
I'd hunt your weak scores downKaoru wrote:
If I had stars I would add them to this. I'd know which of my friends I had highscores and which I wanted to beat this way.
peppy wrote:
I am hoping to address this in a round-about way in the future. For now, due to my previously mentioned reasons, it is not possible.You need an index per-user per-beatmap ordered by score. As this information is obviously not stored in a single table, it means duplicating a lot of data, which all needs to be updated on a regular basis. Making this an efficient lookup is one of the most challenging query types for a database. It of course can be done, but requires a lot of optimisation, consideration and storage space.mmstick wrote:
I don't see how this would be intensive to implement, plenty of other games do this. One way would be to store all scores on a server, only keeping the highest score a user makes and the client simply grabs the data from the website database in real-time (similar to embedding a frame of a webpage). Another way would be for the clients to individually ask other clients for their highest local scores to sync with and promptly attempt to sync with friends clients when a new high score is obtained.
Your solutions may sound simple to you, but aren't actually feasible due to over-simplication (suggestion 1) or incorrect approach (suggestion 2).
I might not understood the whole problem, but how about having a "Show friends scores" button for each beatmap in the client, which then downloads the full rankings for said map and parses the info in the clients own computer?peppy wrote:
I am hoping to address this in a round-about way in the future. For now, due to my previously mentioned reasons, it is not possible.You need an index per-user per-beatmap ordered by score. As this information is obviously not stored in a single table, it means duplicating a lot of data, which all needs to be updated on a regular basis. Making this an efficient lookup is one of the most challenging query types for a database. It of course can be done, but requires a lot of optimisation, consideration and storage space.mmstick wrote:
I don't see how this would be intensive to implement, plenty of other games do this. One way would be to store all scores on a server, only keeping the highest score a user makes and the client simply grabs the data from the website database in real-time (similar to embedding a frame of a webpage). Another way would be for the clients to individually ask other clients for their highest local scores to sync with and promptly attempt to sync with friends clients when a new high score is obtained.
Your solutions may sound simple to you, but aren't actually feasible due to over-simplication (suggestion 1) or incorrect approach (suggestion 2).
It still requires downloading info from leaderboard beforehand, no?Kalle wrote:
I might not understood the whole problem, but how about having a "Show friends scores" button for each beatmap in the client, which then downloads the full rankings for said map and parses the info in the clients own computer?
But only if user pushes the button to check, it wouldn't happen automatically, which would drastically reduce the traffic. can't really think about better method mainly because my understanding about programming is very minor.Winshley wrote:
It still requires downloading info from leaderboard beforehand, no?Kalle wrote:
I might not understood the whole problem, but how about having a "Show friends scores" button for each beatmap in the client, which then downloads the full rankings for said map and parses the info in the clients own computer?
Imagine million of users trying to fetch the leaderboard from the server...
This idea is interesting, which I support. But we need an efficient method so that it doesn't take too much server load.
it's how peppy implemented it. don't expect him to do exactly what the request is asking for.mochi wrote:
Any chances of there being a ranking list containing ONLY friends? I don't believe anybody asked for a unified list...