[DGD] Persistent Users

[Blain]

To me, nothing pertaining to a player should be in memory when they aren't
around.  Their user object and body aren't usually part of the story or
necessary for other players.  In my lib model, I save everything to disk.
I don't trust the swap file, especially not with a player's hard work.

On Sep 21, 2016 10:59 AM, "Gary" <gary at mups.co.uk> wrote:

Hey all,

Assuming a mudlib has separate connection, user and player body
object(s) (Phantasmal for example has a separate player body)

For persistent muds, the player body never needs to be saved out when
the user disconnects. It just remains where it was left (or moved to a
meat locker etc).

What I was pondering earlier today is whether there's any reason to not
also make the user object[^1] itself persistent.

This would avoid the need to save out the password (and any other user
account data that is added). Cloning of the user object would then only
occur when no user object exists in the userd for that name. Destroying
would only occur for actual account deletion.

Over time you could end up with a number of inactive user object hanging
around in the swap unused. However, that would appear to be the same
problem you face with unused player bodies and could likely be dealt
with via the same mud policies.

Other than the increase in inactive objects am I overlooking a major
flaw with this idea?

Cheers,

Gary

[1]: The hard-coded kernel "admin" user would continue to use a .pwd file.
____________________________________________
https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd