• All submissions to this site are governed by Second Life Project Contribution Agreement. By submitting patches and other information using this site, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agreed to those terms.
Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: SVC-1444
Type: Bug Bug
Status: Resolved Resolved
Resolution: Won't Finish
Priority: Major Major
Assignee: Unassigned
Reporter: Thurston Vendetta
Votes: 7
Watchers: 3
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
2. Second Life Service - SVC

Object name and descroption limit is now too small

Created: 05/Feb/08 01:08 AM   Updated: 28/Aug/09 07:31 PM
Component/s: Scripts
Affects Version/s: Mono Beta, Havok4 Beta, 1.18.6 Server, 1.19.0 Server
Fix Version/s: None

Environment: Second Life 1.18.5 (3) Nov 28 2007 13:59:53 (Second Life Release) Windows XP
Issue Links:
Relates
 

Last Triaged: 24/Aug/09 09:06 AM


 Description  « Hide
It is known that the object name and description limits were 16384 bytes and making an object with a name that long broke scripts that either picked it up on a sensor or listened to it. Linden Labs fixed this by limiting the object's name and description to 65 characters. A more reasonable limit of say 1024 characters should be used instead as objects with descriptions of that length are not likely to break scripts since leaving scripts running with sensors and listens open that have only 1024 bytes free is not a common practice.

 All   Comments   Change History      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
darling brody added a comment - 05/Feb/08 01:36 AM
I support this request. Active scripts running in world have been using the description to store information for a long time.

Many of these scripts clear the description after they have finished, which is why I was not sent a warning email and why my grid wide teleproter network failed without warning.

Clearly long object descriptions dont corrupt the asset servers as they have existed for many years now, so there is no reason why we cant have 1k or 2k of memory space in the description to prevent legacy scripts from failing.

This is not only an issue of having extra memory space, it is about the ability to reset a script and still have some dynamic startup perametors, as apposed to static startup parametors that can be read from a notecard.

Darling Brody - Teleporter scripter, sadly known for making a weapon


Clarknova Helvetic added a comment - 05/Feb/08 02:14 AM - edited
I agree. The limit to 64 characters was a drop by four orders of magnitude. A bit extreme.

Even very large scripts have at least 2 to 4k free.


Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 05/Feb/08 06:25 AM
Object name is limited to 63 characters and description to 127 characters.

Salahzar Stenvaag added a comment - 03/Apr/08 04:09 PM
I warmly second this... My boards are using object description to pass parameters among link set in a consistent way, and 127 chars are not enough to pass a "board page" which if using utf-8 (and especially llEscapeURL, since lindens now DONT allow using utf8 in a consistent way in object description). So a simple 50 internationalized string might overflow easily the limit (1 char can be 9 real chars when urlencoded: %e2%e8%ec or something like this)...
Should I file also a request for re-allowing utf8 characters in object description?

Alexa Linden added a comment - 26/Aug/09 09:06 AM
Won't finish - The sizes where chosen deliberately - the fields aren't designed for long data storage.

darling brody added a comment - 26/Aug/09 03:17 PM
Re-Opened

I understand that you need to limit the size for storage in mySQL. However there is no reason to limit it this small when in-world. In fact it could hold an unlimited amount inworld until last year when someone lowered it.

For years now people have been making scripted items that pass or store information as part of their processing in the name and description.

Alternativly you could let us create global valiables that can be seen by other scripts.

ie.
global string MyString;
or
global list MyList;

Until we have a shared memory space between scripts the quick fix is to let us have longer in-world names as we previously did.


Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 26/Aug/09 09:02 PM
It is more than just limiting the size for storage. It was also causing inventory loss (SVC-674) and being exploited to crash other scripts (see Scripters : Object Name and Description Changes.

darling brody added a comment - 27/Aug/09 03:16 PM
The script crashing would only happen if you cramed around 8k of data into the name.

Most legitimate uses of it were putting 1-2k of data in there. the same amounts that we see in HTTP responces and emails. There is no reason an in-world onject cant be permitted to store 2k at the most.


Ezian Ecksol added a comment - 28/Aug/09 03:23 AM - edited
Eventually LL cuts off all possibilities to store in a simple way some prefs for a scripted object and does not gives us any alternative. That's somehow frustrating. Can you understand that?

Strife Onizuka added a comment - 28/Aug/09 11:12 AM
I beg to differ when you say "there is no reason" Darling. When the user hovers their mouse over the object the name has to be transmitted, a short name can fit in a single packet but a longer name and description may take several. This in turn decreases response time, and increases lag. Possibly the worst part about this is the information being stored isn't even intended to be read by a user; so when a user stumbles upon it, they are left saying "WTF???" which isn't a good user experience.

Lets examine the score:

Pros:

  • Provides script-reset resistant storage.
  • It's easy, it's generally already available

Cons:

  • Increases lag
  • When the user stumbles upon it, it takes longer to load
  • When the user stumbles upon it, more often than not, they don't know what to make of it.
  • Not private or secure
  • In mod objects, can be modified by the owner.

I feel the pain here, but this isn't the right solution to this problem. We need some form of persistent script memory.


darling brody added a comment - 28/Aug/09 07:31 PM
Lag? Are you kidding me? what are the odds that someone will however over it while the data is being passed though the description?
...anyway, those in the know use a child prim so the data is not confusing, and so link messages transmitting it can have their scope limited.

the rest of the cons are irralavant because they are true for long or short names.

I agree we need some kinda of meta data storage for objects that can be set by scripts, but until we get it we have to use what we have. More to the point the unnessisarily harsh changes have broken content when they didnt need to.