|
|
|
Wow, I have to say this is one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas. Truly, I'm blown away by it. Lindens, come on. This is absolutely ridiculous.
If you really want "to help reduce the probability of taking an object you can't re-rez", how about providing us with better archiving tools, rather than crippling what already exists? I'm curious, exactly how many of us builders did you consult before deciding that such a handicap would be beneficial? Like Ceera, I often have cause to take several thousand prims at once. This 1000-prim cap will put a serious dent in my ability to do my job effectively. It will cost me time, and my clients money, totally unnecessarily. Please, please, please abandon this idea right here and now. I see the logic of trying to build in something to prevent accidentally taking a group of objects that you can't re-rezz, but this isn't the way. People need to be able to take whole sim builds quickly and easily. The 1000 prim limit seems very arbitary as well. Is it possible to build in two options e.g. "Take small group" (limited to 1000 or whatever figure seems right) and "Take unlimited group" (allowing for a full sim of prims)?
Whoa! Talk about stupid ideas! In a library/educational environment, it's not at all uncommon for us to move a building and all of its contents (photos, artifacts, furniture, exhibits, ....) to another location, or simply to archive a large exhibit. (We just moved a huge library building and all contents from one sim to another two weeks ago, in fact.) When we have put a huge amount of time into developing a resource like that, we count on being able to preserve a copy for historical purposes or simply as a backup. It would be time-consuming and physically impractical to save it in 1000 prim chunks.
I just did a spot-check for one of my major University Clients. Rutgers University. In their 4-sim area I have no less than six buildings that easily exceed 1000 prims per building - detailed and accurate reproductions of buildings that are on their RL campus, most of them on the National Registry of Historic Places.
I just recently remodeled one of those buildings, and now I can not make an archive copy of the changed structure, because of these new and completely irrational limits. The building is 1500 + prims, and can NOT be broken down into several seperate sections and archived in pieces. Nor can I place it in a rezzer box, without taking ownership of the 85% of the building that remained untouched in the remodel, and which belongs to their sim owner account. It's an occupied, in-use building. I can't delete and re-rez it to get it into a rezzer box. But before this change, I easily could have selected the necessary linksets and loose prims (like doors), and could have made an archive copy in my inventory. So, who is going to tell my Ivy Leage University client that it is not a "Showstopper" that the work they paid for can't be archived? Why did a Linden quietly and without comment reduce this from "Showstopper" to "Major"? Looks like this may have been too broad a fix for a related problem. Is the coalescing routine unable to see the script counts?
This is truly a show stopper in that large custom builds will no longer be able to be completed. If a Linden downgrades, please state the reason of the downgrade.
I think is a really BAD idea. Many people will have all sorts of problems with that limit.
This would break the Scope Cleaver Bartlett House project. This was a painstaking project that Scope designed and many builds sit in this category. Let's hope they get around this.
The 1.23 viewer has the ability to restore an object to its last position in a region or the same position in another region.
And I do not mean to imply that this issue should not be fixed. Harleen, that still doesn't result in an archive copy that can be restored if a server crash or a sim officer with edit rights accidentally deletes hallf of the corporate HQ building. Nor does it help if you need to relocate a complex build, but the new sim isn't a terraform clone of the old sim. I'll bet that 99% of the people who are forced to move from the mainland to Ursula will have to rez their build at completely different coordinates in the new sim than what they had in the old sim.
And how do you "restore an object to its last position in a region" if the object can't be taken into inventory, and no longer exists in the original region? From the Blog:
Quote: So, apparently we're getting some sort of limits, no matter how badly this cripples large-scale building. Wonderful... It's funny because there always has been some kind of limit. I remember when I had to move my 11,000 prim build it was necessary to take it in 4 parts. But perhaps I self limited for my own ease of mind, I don't recall, it was a long time ago. That being said, 1000 prims seems extremely low. voted.
Why not? 5000 prim building you use the Take Copy option to create five 1000 prim coalesed objects, then said building is deleted, you Restore Object to Last Location from the five coalesed objects.. Again I do not mean this as a workaround or that this in any way negates the need for this to be fixed, I beleive it needs to be reverted. How about a strongly-worded warning dialog instead of completely removing the choice?
Experienced/informed SL users already understand the risks involved, and by all means ensure that everyone else is made aware of said risks. But there's no reason to disallow a tool so important to large-scale builders. Ok, this is a serious problem for any developer doing sim designs. I always try to use more sophisticated ways, but having this brute force way is a nice backup. And frankly I don't even really understand what it is supposed to fix?
What kind of objects are there that I can take and not rez? Shouldn't that be a bug in itself that should be fixed? Or if this is about mixing of copy and non copy items, maybe throw a popup listing the non copy items, the ability to deselect them and confirm the copy/take to inventory. ps, I was not aware of Restore Object to Last Location. The number of linksets always seemed to be a better indicator of reliability than the number of prims. For example, working with 1000 individual prims seems much more stressful and less reliable than 100 10-prim linksets. It makes me wonder if the number of prims is the correct criterion.
I agree that 1000 prims is a showstopper. I also agree that maybe some limit could be imposed. For example, it seems reasonable to say that you can't take a whole sim into inventory. But experienced builders have known for a long time that taking really big things is risky. If something is big and important, then I always rez the copy to verify that it is good before I delete the original. ^^
fix or increase link limit to 15000 and the "link box thingy" to 256 by 256 by 4096 D< I have a ballroom I'll have to rebuild If the reason for the change in merely "because it was possible to take coalesced objects that you could not then re-rez.", then the answer is 'simple' (in concept at least).
Make the default 1000. If the real issue is not the rezzing process but the selecting process, thee same solution applies. People who unset the limit should be aware of the potential problems. Have a client Preferences setting that removes the limit. If a builder unsets the limit, then it's up to them to use their fingers to work out if a build will rezz in a particular location. If there's going to be a limit, it needs to be architected and documented, at least in http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Limits
I suspect the original problem here was the rezzing process fell over and the excuse was "you're trying to rez too much at once", where "too much" was never defined. With a hard rezzing limit set, now you can take something you can't rez....and the "fix" is to limit takability. Lovely. Brittle old C++ code full of undocumented fixed-length tables. Ew. Good grief! This is getting ridiculous! I'm hardly a large scale builder, working on 8192 sq.m., but now I can't take a copy of my relatively small build anymore! I must wonder whose DUMB idea this was, the Linden who downgraded the issue the first time around? Send whichever Linden is responsible to us for the collective jeering that is due! First you break permissions so builders got screwed by losing permissions on their own work, and now you make it impossible to back up a build just in case something like that happens again?
BRILLIANT!! Still set too low. 1000 prims is not an acceptable limit. I tried taking a copy of just PART of a full-perms building, consisting of a mere 7 linksets but just over 1000 prims, and it still says there is a hard limit at 1000.
Second Life 1.23.1 (119104) May 4 2009 17:53:10 (Second Life Release Candidate) Built with MSVC version 1400 You are at 293989.0, 296307.9, 41.3 in RUCE 2 located at sim2715.agni.lindenlab.com (216.82.18.212:12035) CPU: Intel Pentium 4 Northwood (2259 MHz) libcurl Version: libcurl/7.18.1 OpenSSL/0.9.8j zlib/1.2.3 If this problem is not solved at once, I will never be able to finish my Starships.
This prim limit will make all of SL very depressed and unhappy. It is VERY IMPORTANT to me, and to all of you it seems, that the limit is taken away at once. There really is no point in having such a limit like this. My company builds large Star Ships and large custom builds, this is insane and pointless for people who use large builds, We use entire sims for ground buildings. Rendering it impossible to save work. This needs to be changed, otherwise there will not be a point to second life, I thought second life was where you create what YOU want, Its your imagination. Anything is possible, but this prim limit ruins this!
Yet another lovely part of this bug! You also can no longer DELETE more than 1000 prims at once!
WHY??? I rezzed a 1300 or so prim archive copy of part of one of the Rutgers projects, to replace some damaged pieces. With it all still selected, I wanted to delete what I had just rezzed, as I had grabbed a larger archive chunk than I had intended. But I could not delete it! Got the same blasted message about a 1000 prim limit on my action! So I had to select dozens of individual bits and delete them in small groups, to get rid of the crap I didn't need. this is a good thing for WHAT reason??? FIX THIS!!! I feel you Ceera! I've been testing a rezzer today that is rezzing a 5000 prim build. There's a problem in the rezzer, so I've been rezzing, deleting, rezzing, deleting... And deleting is a royal pain. It takes multiple select/delete operations and I frequently select just a few too many and have to redo it.
I don't ever want to see those prims again. There's no need to protect their integrity. This whole thing seems to have started with SVC-1571, in which people were having trouble rezzing zillions of Zyngo machines, among other things. I agree with Sling's suggestion. Set 1000 (or whatever) as the default so that impatient people who can't wait for the asset servers to catch up won't be whining about large coalesced objects failing to rez. Then, if a builder wants to raise the limit, kick up a warning that say "Objects may rez slowly. Please be patient." It's asinine for builders who know how to handle large coalesced objects to be crippled because a few people can't.
Right now I have two bids pending for a total of seven sims worth of custom-developed content. Both jobs are for an Ivy League real-world University. I can tell you right now that if this limit is not increased to at least 2500, I will NOT be able to make in-progress archive backups of many of the structures in this detailed and complex set of custom sims. LL is asking me to work entirely without a net here, risking the entire multi-sim project for my University client for the sake of an entirely arbitrary limit.
At this point, I am quite tempted to tell my client to NOT order the six sims for the larger project, and to put the entire project ON HOLD, until this matter is resolved. That is THOUSANDS of real US dollars worth of work that I could be doing, and that I might LOSE, but I can not, in good conscience, even start on the project when I can't assure my client that any content accidentally lost due to server failures of accidental deletions can be restored immediately from my archival backups. My clients have always known that when I build for them, if anything happens to their build, it can be restored with a minimum of time and effort on my part. I can't offer that assurance any more, because I can no longer archive the work! Rolig, you may be right. But SVC-1571 was about coallesced objects with over 1000 SCRIPTS in them, not PRIMS. The typical builds I am dealing with may have 1500 to 3000 prims, but likely have 100 or fewer scripts - mostly in the doors and windows.
Also, SVC-1571 is primarily about a parcel return's UNCONTROLLED coallescing of items returned en-masse to the original owners. That is FAR different from inhibiting an individual from manually selecting and taking things into their own inventory. SVC-151 should have placed limits on how the parcel return was allowed to coallesce things - like making it return each item individually, instead of as a coallesced lump in the first place! If the problem is SCRIPTS, then they fixed this in entirely the wrong way, because you could still have a far lower number of prims with well over 1000 scripts in them. I agree this is a serious issue. While I do small scale work, (not buildings yet) stuff like this confuses alot of people and gives the impression that the left hand doesnt know what the right is doing. How can I convince a small client to allow its products to be seen inworld if some like Ceera can't get her job done for Rutgers because someone decided that the asset server cluster bottleneck should be solved with a hard limit.
So if we must have hard limits, I suggest 15000. I want that when you edit illuminate a massive linked structure it gives you a time to rez and option to take all or separate into smaller pieces. I do agree 1000 is too low. So Lindens involved, how about going around to those Educators you trumpet, to the cisco campus etc and check the build sizes. You will be surprised. Finally can we have some sanity here. You, Lindens, know who does the biggest work. You know who spends the most. Can you actually support them? Tier of privileges. Its sound business sense. And it isnt hard to take a moment and ask a simple question. Honestly, not everyone can come to office hours. So how about this: Post your actual internal pipeline of events. You will get rewarded with discussion from the people who actually do the work. All we want is communication and discussion. We want to know. We won't always agree but we will respect you more and there will be less rancor this way. I don't even risk taking 1000+ prim linksets anymore. They have a bad habit of ending up corrupted and unrezzable if you're not careful, and sometimes even if you are. Why not use builders buddy or something? Highlight groups, link, throw scripts in and save the whole build reliably. And then just re-rez, click done, and unlink the pieces. Sure it might take a few minutes but if it's a build you care about I think it's worth the extra time and effort.
Still, it's a bit odd to impose a limit like that. Unless LL kept getting a ton of complaints about large linksets being corrupted. Hopefully this is just temporary until they can (*cough*) make the asset servers reliable... This is an unacceptable limitation.
I do not pay over $300 USD/month to have my builder come to me with lots of random characters such as, "•ÁÓ∞¶ª•§ª¶ÎϪ•" and "∏ˆ•ªÎº•Ï§†Íª•Ï§º" when their builds are unable to be FREAKING BACKED UP So OK. Either, make the full build of one avatar able to be saved (downloaded) to a local file on their computer... or... something else equivalent to this... or undo this limitation. There needs to be a way for people to back up their work. Period. I have to agree with everyone against this new server update, it is ridiculous, i too am a builder and ive created various large scale builds such as one castle that is over 1000 prims, i cannot take it now because of all this, Linden Lab. This was a very silly idea to limit the amount of prims you can take, its bad enough having a limit of Linking a maximum of 256 prims in one set, Again this is more than show stopping... its also strongly restricting to all builders out there..
You know, doing this without a majority vote just spells out for everyone; "Linden Labs has no sense of how to run Second Life proficiently, and they do not care about the residents who pay much money to have fun on it."
You guys better shape up, or there could be a bigger problem then just people posting on this page.. This is an extremely serious issue and well deserving of showstopper status, as there is no workaround- no debug option to get around this limitation.
This needs immediate attention because it seriously affects SL's biggest customers- people who own sims, do sim builds, or other large work. I myself planned to move a 5000 prim WIP build from one sim to another, and this limitation will make for a lot of extra work. However one can see this being a problem for smaller land owners as well- especially ones who are moving their builds to other parcels. STILL BROKEN:
According to the release notes, this limit has not been eliminated in the 1.26.4 Server release, rolling out on Monday. Using Builders Buddy or Rez-Foo is all well and good for a completed build. It is impossible to use effectively for a build in-progress. When making a large build, you constantly are unlinking sections, linking other sets, duplicating similar components and tweaking them. Builders Buddy or Rez-Foo are also impossible to use when archiving changes to a build that is full-perms, but partially owned by the client. Even if it's all in nice handy linksets, you can't make a rezzer for a build that has parts owned by someone else. But before this throttle went in, you COULD do a "Take Copy" on a full-perms build that had multiple owners, if the person doing the Take Copy had mod rights for the other owner's prims. There should be NO limits on doing a "Take Copy" on a FULL PERMS BUILD. If it fails to rez later, WHO CARES? The original still exists, and you still have it in inventory! There should be NO limits on doing a "DELETE" on ANY BUILD. WHO CARES if it can rez later? You are deleting it! Perhaps there should be limits on doing a Take (not TakeCopy) of a selection that is NOT full perms. For example a selected house that includes a no-copy scripted bed. But 1000 prims is still too low. My preference would be a warning if selecting a large group of prims, or if selecting something that includes no-copy items. Just a "This may fail to rez if you take something this big." message, and a "Cancel" or "Do It Anyway" choice. With new adult rules many people will have to move.
With this Limit they will be unable to move ad this way will loose money. This is the most stupid way to go. The Linden-typical fear of communicating with users has given us not very much warning.... I have spent allot of $$$$$$$$$$ in this game and there may not be many of us wanting to take, save, build things over 1000 prims but to take something away that you had from the start is gonna ruin this and with the competition coming those $$$$ and LLLLL that I have spent here will definatly go someplace else if something like this keeps happening. Actually the more I read and the more I ask around there are alot of reasons that this limit is not a good thing for anyone involved.
Please take away the PRIM reduction......... Is is hindering all that we love to do here. J What Kinda strain is this putting on your asshat server ,that barely works anyway, for you t limit the amount of prims you can take into inventory and delete? This seems a bit over the top it is going to totally mess with so many people that I really feel you need to take a step back, revert this issue, and find another solution to your internal problem that this is an attempt to fix by pawning off limitations on the residents of Second Life.
This doesn't makes any sence... Is this supposed to fix the Asset Server? This just makes people's life harder i guess...
Revert it. This is a pain, and i've voted for it. I have a few builds of this type already archived... not sure how it will affect those! The back up of my mainstores for one thing!
In addition, would it not be possible to add an additional field to the properties window for inventory objects showing the prim count and for coalesced the object and prim count? This information already exists in the edit window when you select these objects when rezzed, can it therefore be added to the properties of each item in our inventories? It would save a lot of hassles for actually knowing how many prims an item is before rezzing and take a lot of the guesswork out of the equation. I have to use the work around of selecting a "name prim" last with the details of the build added to the name and description fields for this very reason. But this doesn't work for returned objects. This is a serious showstopper and (like everything else about this release) it has some serious long term implications. Are you Lindens even reading this? HELLO? WAKE UP!!!
Guys.... read the commentary in:
What we're told here is that an attempt to rez too many prims in one inventory operation is a sim crasher. (Neo, perhaps you've seen this happen? Someplace near-and-dear to your heart? Apparently if the region sees the rezzing process run for too long, it concludes that the rezzer is wedged, and crashes the sim to force a region restart. (Presumably there is a sooper sekret SEC-project JIRA documenting this.) So, long story short, rezzing of unlimited numbers of prims in one inventory operation is going away. Best to learn how to use rezzers like Rez-Faux and Rez Locus and Builder's Buddy that can rez groups of objects at a controlled rate to let the rezzer process take a breath once in a while...because what I'm hearing is this restriction will not be relaxed without a major overhaul of the rezzer code in the sim. I am only using the regular viewer.
I don't usually get involved with the jira but this time I had to speak out. I went to pull up castle yesterday and was unable to do it.. over 1000 prims..I ended up deleting the whole thing piece by piece because I could not put as one piece into my inventory. I was totally shocked as this was something new. I hate it. This is a horrible mistake. We do NOT need prim restrictions on how many prims we take up into our inventory. Why are we paying these outrageous fees when you Linden Lab are doing more and more each day to limit our abilities withing the scope of your 3D world which we the users constructed. As builders, the last thing we need are more restrictions, especially one like this. I am sitting here thinking of all of the unfinished projects, where I simply hightlight and select all. I don't mean to be rude but I am curious if Phillip Rosedale knows about this and who is making these type of decisions without consideration for the customers needs. We were just fine the way it was. Why fix things that are not broken? Please reverse this mistake as soon as possble. Thank you. This arbitrary change was not wanted or needed. There is no way to backup a build to a local hard disk, there is now no way to backup a large build in-world as inventory and others have stated there is now no way to delete more than 1000 objects at once. Adding this arbitrary limit just made the first problem worse and created two new problems that didn't exist - all in the sake of fixing an issue that only happened some of the time. Now THAT's progress we can be proud of!?!
It seems to me that an important consideration has been overlooked:
Anyone who takes over 1000 objects to their inventory, OBVIOUSLY has the ability to re-rez them beause they were rezzed in-world in the first place. This is not necessary, this does not solve a problem, this creates more problems, this should be un-done. As to Maggie's comment about sim-crashing and stability.... If that is the case, then the "Major overhaul of the rezzer code," so that it functions correctly, should be done. If this limit is a temporary "band-aid" of sorts, until LL can push through the fix for the "real" problem, I could understand it remaining temporarily. Imposing inconvenient restrictions on your users INSTEAD of fixing bugs in your own code, however, is not the correct choice. I thought the issue was with the amount of scripts in the coalesced object and not the number of prims...I think I have a vague memory of someone getting a single prim unrezzable just by packing it with tons of scripts (I think the limit was 1022 scripts or somthing)
Not nice at all! Having spent the last 6 months building a project for the Victoria University I now find that the packageing method is borked. Way to go. And yes the students do make builds over 1000 prims over the course of their projects, as a result theye also tend to delete things as well, hence the need to recreate the sims buildings after a cleanup.
Fix or scrub this " improvement" Limiting both the taking of coalesced objects, and the deletion of them to 1000 is a huge mistake. A very large number of my products and projects are over 1000 prims total, and don't bet packaged in something like Rez Faux until they are nearly finished which means that I cannot now take them into inventory to redeploy them at another location without taking the time to pack them into a rezzer, and at thousands of prims that takes a very long time.
Large builds like my 3200 prim castle Skygaard Castle, would never have been completed if this limitation were in place. Sim design work I have done for Non Profits, Corporate and Educational clients would have been severely hampered or limited by this restriction, leaving me with less options and flexibility for those clients. In short, their sims would not be as detailed or nice. I have a demonstration rezzer that the public can use to rez my castles at my sim, and every now and then it clogs during lag storms and rezzes parts that don't derez. This then creates a pile of objects that must be cleaned up. I have to go and delete those clumps of objects manually, but now I have to cherry pick through them one by one to delete them rather than save time by highlighting the whole batch and delete at once. Why has LL decided to decrease the value of SL with this kind of restriction? For builders this is loss of value, not an added value feature. Please return max limits on coalesced objects back to the old standard, which worked. The coders who decided this 1000 prim limit was cool to force on us have shown themselves to be complete incompetents, and should be removed from the teams working on building viewers and new features. I dont understand it seems the wanna spare their servers while there is income enough..
So i dont see the purpose of limitions as it seems they must be able to handle all traffic and server load... PLEASE do not keep this part of the code for all the reasons already stated. I agree with the suggestion to add a warning or popup when taking coalesced items of more than 1k prims. But don't severely restrict those of us who have good reason to take 1k+ builds into our inventories... I have a very good reason right now, but I can't do it, so I'm forced to delete over half of my build simply to be able to take it up, then move it to another sim, where I have to rebuild the deleted pieces. I don't want to have to put a rezzing script into all objects that make up my build, I want to take it into inventory the way I've been able to take it into inventory for the last two years. (and btw, I've never crashed a sim rezzing large builds)
If LL chooses to keep this code, I'm positive it will encounter more issues and complaints than if LL had kept the previous code. This is horrid for those of us who spend most of our time building inworld! And with big companies and institutions coming into Second Life, wanting to recreate realistic and innovative presences, this limitation will severely curtail SL's ability to accommodate their needs as it is already curtailing my needs. If i have several linked objects which total over 1000 prims and i took them back as a group, will this new change fubar them?
"yea it is already just garbage in your inventory since you will never be able to rezz it again in Second Life." WHAT? I have a train station build. Linked in 5 parts. Took it back as a group. weighs in at over 1000 prims. Took me days to build it. Now it's trash? LL.. I swear to god you make some seriously dumb descisions. I vote this gets reverted.
Building showcases in a virtual medium for architectural presentations, this is making my life on this platform a living nightmare. I'm sure LL realizes how this affects potential architectural designers moving onto a 3D program to showcase their designs in a flawless manner. Granted, one of you thought it might have been a good idea at the time, but I'm not sure you factored in the aspect as a whole on who it would affect and how. It would've been better of letting the masses know ahead of time, and working with their inputs instead of acting on a whim. Word is spreading around to have this reverted back to it's original state....or you'll lose a lot of clientele to another program. I am another builder who routinely takes prim heavy builds into inventory in this fashion so as to save a work in progress if I am building on land that does not belong to me, or in general. If I have to box up every stage of my work just to save place holders, it will take an ungodly amount of time that is just not necessary. Lindens, this is simply stupid. This is not a feature, it is a bug. (In general response to many of your decisions of late, we do not need to be baby sat. If we make mistakes that is part of living and learning). Or is this little issue due to renewing your full mysqul license?
The Linden Giveth, The Linden Taketh Away? Ok, there is a reason to impose limits, there is no doubt, but 1000 is just too low a number, raise it to 2000 and you'll have done right by alot of folks who have spent much time on detailed builds. Say yes to progression, say no to regression.
didn't some people mentioned their requirement as numbers >2000 ?
If this limit is to address a limit with the current code, it's reason enough to upgrade the code to something that will handle the needs of the users. Simply telling users, "Oh, the code can't handle it, so you're not allowed to use it anymore," will only cause the users to do one thing: find code that will do what they want, and switch to it. It's a very common trend in the Real World computing market - just look at web browsers, operating systems... Second Life is no different. It's far better to upgrade the code than to burn your users. Scorned users aren't very forgiving, and there's been a good number of companies who've figured that out long after it was too late.
Edit: And as a user, it'd be awefully nice if I could not only figure out which of my coalesced objects are over the 1000 prim limit, but it'd also be nice to at least have some sort of interface for me to sort them back into separate entities within my inventory. Locking up my things into a big void is rather irksome, and that's a bad thing. I agree with all above.
For all those with issues and have large companies as clients, I personally would inform them of what LL has done and what affect it will have on building their sims, maintaining and repairing builds etc, and what it has affected already due to the prim limit changes. All clients small or large will be affected by this change and although the small owner will have little say against LL, informing the large clients LL actively encourage to invest in SL, these will have more influence over the reversal of this decision. Okay, let me get this straight....
1. Can't use megaprims to make builds more efficient in many places. I've learned to build within the limits of megaprims, tweak them, manipulate them, but given the current "taketh away" mode of LL? I'm disinclined to rely on megaprims for long. Are they going to be unmovable? Un-takeable? Un deletable? Un-rezzable? If I tried to build most of the structures on my parcel in regular prims, I'd need a sim's worth of prims for my small parcel, and would then not be able to take or delete or rez those. I don't have >1000 builds.... but i have friends who do...and I'm afraid that my megaprims will be next on the list of arbitrary function removals. Way to staunch the creative juices. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUi-_C7N_5g
This is should be the reason why 1000 is too little. This would not be possible under the current plan. Think about it. There would be no graduation, no celebration, no nothing. If the problem is that the sim programming thinks that rezzed is stalled or frozen because of the extreme time it takes to rez 5000 prims, then the time lenght before the server thinks the rezzer is stalled needs to be increased. If it is actually something else that causes them to be unrezzable, TELL US. The education agenda and the building of campuses and other large builds is in direct opposition to this low limit.
My suggestion is this to link rez limit to advanced menu and have a warning check box: 'If active, some coalesced objects might not rez. We are not responsible for this. You accept full responsibly for any damage or sim crash due to coalesced object rez failure." Add it to the TOS. Everyone is sort of happy. Voted yes, and agree with all of the above.
For LL to roll out this change was not a wise move, especially knowing full well how much it would affect not only currently held builds in inventory. In light of the aforementioned projects underway for various clients and external companies, it would seem to me that it would behoove those with influence over this issue to seriously reconsider. This change only stands to lose money for in-world businesses...not to mention invested dollars from outside interests that have a stake in large scale builds as a representation of their image. I tried to take out a castle which was well over 3000 prims. It ended only being a little over 1000 once it rezzed. There was a huge loss for me.
I'm not willing to test this further although I might try the castle again since it has full perm backups. What I am worried about in addition to this is once we rez an item to "test" it, will the rez corrupt the data for that item in the inventory making future rezzes impossible. Basically that's all we are dealing with, data and servers.. taking or transferring data from one server to another server. That in itself on normal things has its occasional hiccups. Imagine something like this. 8O I suggest to not test your items until LL or in this case Prospero Linden either reverts back (as he should do) or has a fix (highly unlikely) This so called "improvement" is potentially catastrophic on multi levels. It effects every single user in Second Life. Indirectly effects thousands upon thousands of users in Second Life with untold content potentially being destroyed, lost into the netherworld forever.. talking about Twilight Zone. Sure maybe we Second Life users complain or are the polictically correct term .. "passionate" as the Lindens prefer to say for lack of a better word. This is not the same as Adult Content .. that was sorta expected.. or not the same as Open Space Sims.. we can rationalize server costs.. or not the same as VAT .. that was sorta imposed by the EU laws (even if they technically probably don't meet those income requirements.. better be safe than sorry, right?) This is going to destroy thousands upon thousands upon too many bleeping possible to count thousands of user created content. In otherwords, it is the big Tsunami of Second Life. I guess a Tsunami size "Thank you" is in order to Prospero Linden in the way of getting the word out since Prospero Linden snuck this little doozy in the secret dungeon door without making a blog announcement or email notification (which is the better way since most SL peeps do not read the blog in the first place.) Most residents do not have a clue. Time for us to do Linden Lab's job and that is to warn people of the danger that lurks inside their inventory.. to encourage people to run not walk and vote vote vote to have this disaster reversed whilst there is still a chance. Simple as that... Just put a limit on moment when you're about to take selected items into inventory, but no limit when trying to rez them out instead of having limit at all.
I understood they put limit on in the first place to throttle their database's bandwidth to be allowed for each users... but still can't understand how they couldn't see this complex issue coming from user's end. They were thinking too quickly before making the changes. Now I wonder if it's possible to split that "multiple" item into packets as default. Their decision had nothing to do with bandwidth that we already pay an arm and a leg for.. to quote Prospero Linden..
"From the release notes for Server 1.26.3.118580 on 2009 April 28 : Of course this reason is ridiculous since anyone who was able to gather that many prims would also be able to place them out. Is the appointed official for The Lab saying that there will not be any turning back? I would really like to hear Phillip Rosedale speak sometimes on these issues. Just wanted to add to what was said above without intent of changing the topic:
I personally think it's time for LL to expand. Statistics on their website generalize they net worth roughly 2 million dollars a day. A DAY. Think of how far Google has come over the years. They started off as a simple website, now they're a world-wide multi-billion dollar corporation with it's home base being so large they offer bikes to their employees to get from one side of the campus to the other. Anyways, what this boils down to is the fact as much as LL makes, they shouldn't be having troubles with their asset server. They've got plenty enough to get a few more and boost the memory on them to withstand the pressure....and with people like me that have over 50,000 items in my inventory (mostly due to textures and building prims), it's not gonna get smaller any time soon. I don't invest in this business to be told I can't use it. My profound disbelief at this "act of pure genius" is entirely beyond words..!
I have come into the habit of always double-checking today's date, in the mild hope that outrageous information like this, should be stored under "April Fools", but alas, no such luck. KINDLY REASSURE US IMMEDIATELY THAT THIS IS A TEMPORARY BUG..!!! I can of course see that a sim-crashing bug upon rez is indeed a serious matter which needs to be addressed, but this seems like a very inappropriate solution to say the least; thus I am adding my vote.
I dare say it is a bit too late to do anything before the next server update, but I would hope that the Lindens recognise that this basically makes some of the key content development that is the backbone of the grid - large-scale building and sim design - impractical or at best extremely frustrating. (Personally I rarely rez more than a couple of hundred prims as a group at once, but one must have solidarity.) Just verified this.
Rezzing out heavy prim count projects works still, but taking back more than 1000 selected prims at once throws an error message. I had to try it to believe it. Looked like a bad joke. This limit is an insult and slap in the face of every solution provider. Backing up content is hard enough already. Please stop the madness of these limits. It is not only wasting alot money and time, but it makes SL lose attractivity compared to similar mediums. This is just idiotic, fix it please.
just to clarify, have you guys confirmed that rezzing a single coalesced item with more than 1000 prims does still work most of the time?
Other people tried to rez large "globs" and only about 1000 rezzed so i happen to believe the code is bugged if it allows rezzing large globs or there is a server side parameter that can be set (which is exactly how parms should be and not hard coded).
Wasn't the real purpose to supposedly to stop griefers from crashing sims? Here is what LL needs to do if it is related to their precious griefers they do not want to prosecute: Store prim count and dimensions of rezzed glob with the glob. If yes to all three then it is unlikely to be a griefer since griefers typically don't own any land on disposable accounts. If it is database loading then get over the attitudes and hire the right help. Yes they will be more senior than the existing help and likely to take over lead roles. Tough. the system has to handle more to support that one million concurrency remember? Unlike a lot of these guys I don't have huge builds, but as a landlord, what happens if someone renting a 4096M parcel that supports 1124 prims doesn't extend their lease? If I use about land to return their objects will it prevent me from doing so? Or will it return it to them and then I get an angry im that they can't re-rez it and telling me they paid a lot of money for those objects?
The problem this creates is worse than a sim-crashing exploit. Sim crashes rarely lead to data loss.
They have already added the ability to rez a coalesced object in pieces. I experienced that the other day... attempted to rez something where I didn't have enough prims and it rezzed part and threw the rest back to lost+found. This seems like a better solution than either crashing the sim or limiting the number of prims in a coalesced object. @ Ciaran,
As of 1.26.4.120562, the 1000 prim limit does not apply to parcel return. You can still return as many prims as you want. Ann Otoole suggested:
When an attempt is made to rez the glob: Check to see if parcel is large enough. Parcels can be joined and resplit if needed so not a valid counter argument. Check to see if there are available prims on the parcel. Check to see if the person rezzing is the parcel owner. I'd agree on all but the last part. As a pro builder, I am most often working on-site at my client's sim. I don't own the land at all. I may be an Estate Manager, and am probably in a group role that explicitly allows Bulding and terraforming on that parcel. But I am not the parcel owner. Would suggest: That would exclude Joe Griefer who happens to see that Build is still checked for all Residents, while still allowing an authorized person to build. I have NEVER caused a sim to crash by rezzing huge numbers of prims at once. And guess what? If the "Solution" is to use a rezzer like Rez-Foo or Builder's Buddy to pack up and rez large builds, What do you think happens when the user of the rezzer clicks the "Build" button? It REZZES every prim in the build, that''s what! All at once! And furthermore, it does not initially rez them in their final orientation and position, but in an overlapping clump, after which the prims and linksets are moved and rotated into place. This process, when done on a tight lot, can easily cause prims and linksets to swing out over other people's parcels, causing that linkset to be returned by the neighbor's parcel return. Most rezzers I know of do not rez all their objects at once, but throttle the creation rate to avoid the grey goo fence.
I personally do not believe I have any builds of this size, however, this seems like an EXTREMELY bad idea. Seems from reading many comments and from other forums, many people will be affected by this change, and many of them being world businesses, educational institutions, and many other (I'm sure, high paying) clients who have set up within Second Life on many multiple regions. You guys are sort of shooting yourselves in the foot on this one. Does anyone ever think these decisions through, and why are SL residents never allowed any voice in this? It is always "this is what are going to do", then it's up to us to fight it. Seems a bit backwards.
FYI, LL send out a survey about this issue to people listed as a service provider.
FYI - Today the SL Developer's list got a chance to answer a 4-question survey about this limit.
I'd repost the questions here, but they used Surveymonkey to do it and it only lets you access it and reply once. I think the first question was weather you do large builds or not, over 1000 prims. (Can't recall this one for sure). One question was about the largest number of prims you "routinely" used to do a Take or Take Copy on. Another question asked you to say how many items you had in inventory that were under 1000 prims, 1-2K, 2-3K, 3-4K 4-5K, 5-10K, and over 10K prims. Which of course you can't HONESTLY answer without rezzing every suspected large thing somewhere, since there is NO way to see how many prims are in any item in inventory! The last "question" was a "other comments" field that was too small to give any more than a couple sentances, but I used t to pointg out that we can't answer the third one accurately. Can anyone on the SLDev Mailing list who hasn't taken that survey yet please copy the questions and repost here? Surely there are many people who do large builds but are not on the SL Dev list. They should get a chance to answer, here. This is precisely why my company refuses to put significant resources into Second Life - because we have absolutely no faith that those resources - time, money, creativity - won't be completely wasted.
Something for the Linden Coders to think about:
If you guys were working for Microsoft instead of Linden Lab, and you had a bug in the code for Excel that occasionally made people lose data if they tried to save or open spreadsheets with 50,000 lines in them, would you "Fix" it by issuing a patch that castrated their ability to save spreadsheets with more than 3000 lines? How long do you think you would remain employed if you pushed a patch like that out to Microsoft's users, without advance warning? Do you think the fact that "Most people only use Excel for small spreadsheets" would go over very well with Corporate users, who on occasion DO use the full 65K lines in an Excel spreadsheet? I'd bet you'd get fired in less than a day, if you did something that bone-headed and short-sighted. Yet that is exactly what you did to large-scale builders in SL, by issuing this throttle in the server code. Think about that. What is the difference? The solution here isn't to castrate user's abilities. The solution is to fix your own buggy code and eliminate the asset server problems that make it difficult for SL to take or rez really large selections of prims. Like maybe dumping MySQL in favor of a Professional Level database engine, instead of one suited to a hobby user? I have but one word that describes this change.
"BONEHEADED" Ceera's hypothetical analogy would be more on-point if the bug included a remote exploit that allowed anybody to crash the machine running the spreadsheet.
Good lord, did someone on the payroll think this one up? Truly it would look to an outsider that you've been trying to tear apart small businesses in SL for some time now, but despite all the horrendous mistakes you've made, the residents just struggle on, but this is a biggie guys....it's already caused me no end of problems with builds and I can see many many more to come, how about for once...just ONCE, you listen to the people that have created your world for you and see that this time you've really screwed up. Maybe someone can let us know what is being done about this instead of ignoring your residents.
i am shocked and disappointed by this one.
not reverting this would be a severe mistake. filing this jira should never have become necessary, how COULD this have been allowed to roll out? 1 if huge soft linksets are a problem then we need to be able to crack colesed objects in inventory 5 i think that the person that signed off on this should be required to OUT OF POCKET pay to have the items (know where we can get a good set of stocks???) http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Prospero_Linden
https://blogs.secondlife.com/people/Prospero.Linden Appararently, Prospero is no longer a Linden. So either he was fired or this was his last project and has planned on doing it and then leaving. Also want to share this: MySQL: Forked beyond repair? wasn't Prospero one of the good guys? or am I mixing my Lindens?
@Tigro, I always found Prospero to be intelligent, diligent, and straightforward. May he find rewarding work, perhaps in astrophysics, which is what his doctorate is in.
OK, so I can't even select over 1000 prims on my land and delete them?! You have to be joking,,,figure it out people, deleting mass items will help decrease the sim load - did I miss something?!!!!
hm, so is there any evidence this limit was Prospero's idea?
No. As release manager, he took on the role of explaining it to the residents when it surfaced.
I'm sorry, I know this is important to a lot of people and I know it wrecks the hard work of many talented people and wastes a lot of money... but I'm just laughing. Because it's the clearest proof yet that LL are on the verge of collapse. They haven't a clue about how their product is used by their customers and so they do things like the Openspace mess, the botched implementation of adult control, the tiny-killer deformation mistake and now this piece of idiocy. Some of these blunders happen because they decide the price in angry customers is worth paying, and some because they don't see the problem coming, but the result is the same. As soon as a viable alternative to Second Life appears (and it can't be long before one arises, the speed at which creative people are being driven away by LL) we'll all be off like a shot and Second Life will be Alta Vista for the new decade.
I just wished that this limit wouldn't exist, it destroys so much work, it makes people unable to resolve problems with more than 1000 prims and the creators of objects like houses, ships, spaceships and anything else have to rebuild their work, that can be more than 100.000.000 objects, now think if there are bugs which only can be resolved by the creators, they need to re-edit their things they've built. As example, i do have a spaceship which can only normally be rezzed by rezz helpers the parts of the ship are saved into the script, which i can't edit, because i don't have the rights to. Each time i try to take it back, no matter what i did with the ship, i get this message of the 1000 prim limit which avoids me from editing, it won't help to take only 1000 prims of the ship, the other parts went off-world and will do that everytime i rezz them, so it's messed up. There are people which don't know this problem and don't care of it, but when the time has come and they do have such more-than-1000-prims objects and want to take them back after changes, they will experience a worse surprise, with that limit, but it's too late, i guess, to avoid a sim crash, just add a function which shows when a sim would crash, as example a prim count, so when we do have 15.000 prims on a land which has the size of a sandbox, then, if there is something already rezzed which has the summ of 6538 prims, then you have a notice in the objects register 6538 of 15000 prims used, 8462 prims left, as example followed up by 238 prims till crash, with a button to confirm to use those amount of prims, which makes a dialog appearing like: are you sure to risk to crash the sim............. you could add a function to save all into inventory into a folder called "sim backup" the objects are multiple and do have the date and the time when it was saved, so you can restore them after a crash, no matter if objects there are no copy, or avoid from saving and especially for objects which could be corrupted like vendors, make it possible to restore them back into their state, just please remove this prim limit and find a solution instead which is good for both sides, thank you.
Thunderclap ~ I think that is more the issue. LL is freaking because of the Oracle buyout of Sun Microsystems, the previous owners of MySQL. There is speculation that Oracle will be "killing off" MySQL which would put LL in a major bind. The basic release of MySQL is open source and free, but MySQL Enterprise (the version that would be able to handle LL's current loads on their database servers would be more the concearn. The best way for LL to find a real solution to this problem would take them doing some serious recoding and it would take them moving over to something more like Postgres or similar. My hunch is that both the Open Space arrangements and the limitation of other database related actions are tied to the MySQL issue. Fundamentally though, if LL sits back and decides to rely on simple MySQL, it will hamstring the whole platform and turn it into a slightly more glorified version of the SIMS.
@jacquelin:
I highly doubt anyone is freaking out about MySQL at this point. As the article states, there are forks of the engine itself (And I don't quite share the author's view), and the main issues with LL's databases come from the architecture, not quite from the underlying database engine used. No matter if LL 'sits back' or hastily goes scurrying for a new DB engine to use, it won't change the performance issues in much of a noticable way. At least not in a way that would better be solved by architectural improvements and improved caching. @Random: Opining that this presages the imminent collapse of Linden Research ignores the fact that this kind of faux pas has been happening for years. It's certainly nothing new.
re: MySQL – Oracle is unlikely to do anything drastic to damage MySQL right away. It's just not that big a deal to them. Nor is the Linden gang unaware that they need to get off the platform....a review of F Linden's postings of the past year or so make it clear that efforts to refactor the database interface and scema(s) are underway to make it more structured, which are absolute necessities if a port to another DBMS engine is to happen. I myself have not yet saved a 1k prim build yet. Though there is one sitting in my sim that is still under construction. Backing it up when finished is going to be a pain.
To expound on what robertltux McCallen has suggested: "1 if huge soft linksets are a problem then we need to be able to crack colesed objects in inventory." – If you mean a way to seperate high-prim builds, then yes. It's heartbreaking to imagine the amount of backed up content that is lost, effectively destroyed, with this limitation in place and no way to recover builds saved under the previous capabilities. "2 offical support for mega prims needs to be done by say the 1.25 series (reasonable sizes of course "3 in the properties of an object you need to list the number of prims" – This is a fantastic idea, and would give adequate warning to someone before rezzing an object they were given, as well as a count of how many prims they need to free up on their parcel in order to rez the object.
Seems someone IS listening! ^^ And some of my friends have been testing. Seems they are able to rez objects over 1000 prim. Not sure how other's were rezzing with pieces missing. Could be an increased risk with higher primcounts. Ressing in a fairly empty sim may help. -Edited at 11:50 "objects over 1000 prim" not "100 prim" Point well taken Chalice, and with the note from Wrath from Simon Linden and the limit having been raised to 4000, that does make me wonder. The 4000 prim limit would be a lot more helpful.
Hi everyone,
Initial research showed coalesced objects containing more than 1000 prims could some times be taken into inventory successfully, but could not be re-rezzed inworld - and thus get stuck in inventory. We have also recently addressed some issues to prevent inventory loss when an no-copy object failed to rez. To prevent stuck inventory, we added a limit to the number of prims in a coalesced object on Take, Take Copy and Delete operations. Unfortunately, it's not simply the number of prims in a coalesced object that may cause stuck inventory; the number of scripts for an asset is also a contributing factor. A 900 prim object with large scripts, for example, could also fail. We have, however, heard and listened to the feedback that 1000 is too low of a number and is impacting builders' ability to work with complex builds. We have increased this threshold to 4000. This number is in line with what our Solution Providers suggested and what further testing determined was reasonable. Keep in mind that increasing this limit will impact simulator performance, potentially manifesting in additional, lengthier delays for large objects. One tip to keep in mind when attempting to place large coalesced objects: it is helpful if the region is under as low load as possible - with few avatars and activities going on. Also, consider breaking large builds into smaller sets of coalesced objects. Thanks. I'm sorry but I totally disagree with this decision. In my personal opinion it is NOT resolved. I have quite a few clumped objects in my inventory that are more than 4000 prims. I really hate when Linden Lab just makes a decision like this without thinking it through or even considering how it will effects the residents as a whole.. especially considering in this case when we have been accustomed to selecting all since the beginning of our SL .. in otherwords.. for YEARS.
I wonder, seriously wonder WHY I am paying these outrageous tier fees when I am getting more and more restrictions daily. I NEED to have unlimited prim selection. I never once had an issue with it and I doubt many did. This was just someone's lame idea to make a name for themselves in the Linden Hall of Fame. I am more angry about this decision than I have been about anything that Linden Lab has ever done simply because it effects how I would build or back things up. I am reopening this ticket and I invite Phillip Rosedal or M Linden to take a closer look at it. Please do not just unsurp what was working just fine all these years. We need this ability! Thank you. I'm sorry Dante, this bad cop/good cop routine doesn't quite deal with the issue, perhaps this jira entry in specific has technicly been dealt with, but the underlying issue remains, unrezzable coalesced objects as well as new limits on how people can make coalesced objects are quite the impairment on the activities of many builders, please inform your solution providers the problem that needs a solution is how SL deals (or doesn't) with complex coalesced objects both in making and in rezzing them, the system was supposed to be scalable, make it so, aight?
Another problem for your solution providers to provide a solution, changes that have even a remote chance of affecting content creation and handling, or any other essential part of SL, MUST be discussed with resis before the changes are already decided, otherwise, resis will resent the people working on the system instead of counting on them to fix things, and don't be mistaken, there are a great number of people who will shoot the messenger, and then go after who sent the message
I don't want to be pacified with a weak compromise. I want a complete rollback to the way it was before someone decided to mess things up. I can't even begin to explain how this will effect so many of us.. many who are not even aware of this ticket.. many who probably do not even realize that they have a voice to change things.
We are used to "select my objects only".. then draging the mouse across the screen, highlighting ALL that we own. It was GREAT. I loved it. Everyone loved it! Even Torley Linden told us to do it from our newbie days onward. Now we cannot do that because we shall reach some ridiculous prim limit that was never there before. A whole way of SL life is changed. This effects us on every level, from the newbie on the sandbox to our private sims. It will discourage creativity, especially to the newcomer. I wonder if Linden Lab has even begun to realize the unbalance this will cause, the stifling in creativity, etc? I actually feel like part of my basic civil rights are being trampled on simply because this is a practice and tool that I have been accustomed to for all these years.. a lovely, convient tool. Obviously at one time Linden Lab felt the same or they wouldn't have offered it to us and Torley suggesting we use it. No, we won't be able to use it freely as before if you do not do a rollback because there is the danger that when one selects all, he will exceed the prim limit. What a mess that will make. Seriously, aren't there enough things broken without spending time on "parking tickets". I'm sure that comment went above the heads of many but that's ok too. PLEASE give us back our ability to select all and take it as we select it without fear of prim limit. Not everyone has the time to put things in a rezzer. Selecting all was a wonderful way to back things up.. or to move things, etc. It just doesn't make sense to me why you feel the need to hurt us like this when there are so many more worthy causes to work on. This was NOT a problem. It was something that actually worked. All of your techno geek talk will not convince me otherwise simply because I used this method for 3 years. Others even longer than me. PLEASE do not do this. Revert back to the way it was before. There is no logical reason to do this, to change our basic way of saving and building, etc.. It was such a fantastic tool to have and it would be a huge tragedy to lose it. Thank you. While I appreciate that you listened to us and made an accommodation, I agree with Vryl in that the best limit on this is no limit. The original JIRA that this change was in response to was about coalesced objects with >1022 scripts crashing regions; if that is the only cause then this limit should be based on the number of scripts rather than the number of prims. (You can't do that? Providing a #scripts and #prims viewable in inventory would be a great help.) If it's closer to a matter of memory usage or number of links to different assets which are part of the object, it would be preferred to base the limit on that rather than number of prims.
Edit: "1 if huge soft linksets are a problem then we need to be able to crack colesed objects in inventory."
"2 offical support for mega prims needs to be done by say the 1.25 series (reasonable sizes of course
I think a good compromise for this would be some sort of code that allows the rezzing of an object up to the maximum x, y size of the resident's (owned) parcel. Limiting mega prim rezzing to land owners should eliminate griefing possibilities. Worse case scenario, limit it to Private Estates / region owners. I'd recommend making it a group permission, so that owners could add a builder to a group so that the builder could make mega prims for the owner's sim build. "3 in the properties of an object you need to list the number of prims"
Edit: Bottom line for me is that owners of Estates should be given the option to allow rezzing coalesced objects up to the maximum the region will support. Considering they're paying the highest land fees of all users in Second Life, this would give Estate ownership much more value. As long as there's a disclaimer advising against the large rez and a check box for "I understand," then that should keep liabilities off of Linden Lab. I think the option should be to limit by default, but the Estate owner should be allowed to alter the limit, or remove it completely. de-coalescing items in order to rez it as separated pácks would not work for people that intentionally pack together a whole castle or somthing like that, would be kinda like having to take to inventory in bits from the start, would require realigning when rezzing. But it would be helpful for things like picking apart a whole parcel sent to lost&found to recover individual items
for rezzing intentionally massive coalesced objects, assuming the sim can handle the whole thing, dividing the object in sim digestible chunks automaticly while rezzing, and throtling the rate the chunks are rezzed, keeping position and rotation offsets of course, I think might both allow for huge constructions to be packed and re-rezzed unharmed as well as not choking the sim Actually, if it's the scripts in the object that are causing the crashes, is it the sudden spawning of so many scripts that is causing the issue? If so, perhaps set it so that all scripts are off in an object if it's scripts and or prims are greater than some limit. That, and throttling the rezzing on the sim sounds to me like it'd be a decent fix.
Thanks for the update Dante and fellow Lindens. It is a noble task to eliminate the core problems that plague SL inventory. However, we must be careful that the solution is not worse than the issue it was intended to fix. I think we need to focus on why inventory is being lost in the first place and hope that this recent limitation is just step closer to finding and repairing the root cause of inventory loss. That being said, I would urge you to ensure that users can rez their builds from inventory regardless of prim count for the sake of backward compatibility. Increasing the limit to 4000 was a good thing but the perfect solution would allow a limit equal to the sim limit (i.e. 15,000).
Dante,
Thank you for raising the throttle to 4000. That makes this a little easier to survive. What server code release is this raised in? Has it already been pushed to the full grid? But I agree with the others that the root cause for the need to limit this is what should be fixed. Throttling take and take copy and delete doesn't address the root cause, it only addresses a possible symptom. A better stop-gap fix would be at issue a warning when trying to take more than 4000 prims at once, while still allowing an advance builder to insist "I know what I am doing, and I still want to proceed". There are some very valid cases where it is still the ONLY reasonable way to deal with some large builds. It's easy to say "consider breaking large builds into smaller sets of coalesced objects", if you've never built at that scale. But those of us screaming the loudest at this limit aren't worried about not being able to pick up 23 little ranch-style houses and the sidewalks between them. Were talking things like a single building or a spaceship where it takes well over 1000 prims for a single, unified structure. Take a good look at the Rutgers campus. RUCE 1 through RUCE 4. Look at any of the large buildings in RUCE 2, and you tell me how any of them could be "split up" into smaller coalesced chunks, and still be able to be aligned precisely as a single unit when you re-rezzed them. Especially when trying to back up the in-progress changes as you are building such large structures. I said the division would only happen at rez-time, it wouldn't be noticeable for builders other than by having chunks of the build take a bit more to show on the sim, but they would show in exact position and rotation in relation to the rest of the build as they were when they were taken, if the sim once had it all in, it should still be able to have all in, if adding all at once is an issue, add it graduallly (I'm talking about the sim, nothing would change for builders, I mean, in relation to back when there wasn't a limit, expect perhaps to the time it takes to completly rez a complex build)
Did a check, and the new 4000-prim limit has already been rolled out. Probably all they had to do for that was a tweak at the asset server end, rather than every sim on the grid, since the server version in the sim I checked in hadn't noticeably changed.
At least now I can finish archiving the Rutgers campus., and its last round of remodeling. I would imagine that 4,000 prims for a bundle is considered fix for this seeing how the JIRA here only points to 1,000 prims max and not 4000. If you have a issue with the 4,000 prim limit please make a new JIRA and don't re-open this one.
What if we disagree about it being a valid fix/resolution?
Changed jira title so it doesn't erroneously appear fixed.
 Reduced priority to major.
Changing the name... Sneaky sneaky... :-p But it works. lol. Reopened it is. lol
I would suggest changing the title word "IMPOSSIBLE" to "problematic" as the 4000 limit will not hamper nearly as many of us. It solves my issues, thank goodness, of my 3500 prim build.
My main problem with it was I like to select whole sections of my land with select only my objects on and off. Just to see if the garden is usng 2k prims, the house and furnishing 1k.. that sort of thing. Not to actually move things at all. If it turns out the garden is way over its prim budget i run through it and remove stuff individually. With the limit on for some reason I
was only able to tell the house and furnishings and skybox and furnishings were more than 1k each. It was really goofy showing all wrong etc. I didnt even try to hand count prims... I cant say how relieved I am at the change back. Yay . thanks.
The 4k gets rid of my big problem but to be honest in the future i may have more than two quarter sims in different islands- so when/if I get that big a landholder even if i cant pick it up over 4k cant I at least count it and change its groups if its all mine? I cant actually check the 4k limit to see if it inhibits prim counting the way the 1k limit did cos I just dont have that sort of prim in one place right now. I should probably keep some kind of prim accounting spreadsheet and know exactly whats what but to be honest Im in this sl thing for fun and spreadsheets are my not my personal definition of fun TigroSpottystripes, I'm aware of the "shooting the messenger" risk. I have to accept that risk if I want to provide information to residents in a public jira.
Vryl, if you have objects that can't be rezzed due to their size, you can open a support ticket, and they'll break up the objects for you so that you can rez them. That's not the ideal solution, I know, but at least it will allow you to rez your inventory items. This is the exact situation we are trying to avoid by having the prim limits; we want to reduce the number of instances where residents get items into their inventory that they can't rez. Dajobu, the prim limits being discussed are on taking objects into your inventory, not rezzing them. There is a rez timeout for all objects, if that's what you're referring to, and it was actually increased in 1.26 for land owners rezzing objects on their own land. Ceera, the change was made in the current version (1.26.4.120562). We needed to update a config file on every simhost, but we didn't deploy a new version of software. Also, if we let people take coalesced objects that are too big, even with a "I know what I'm doing" prompt, they still wouldn't be able to rez them consistently without filing a support ticket to have us break up the objects. We are putting together a short Knowledge Base article that will give an overview of why we have prim limits on coalesced objects. Hopefully it will help people understand why the limits exist, even if they aren't happy with that fact. ok Dante, but can you please provide us confirmation that the issues that cause LL to have to prevent people from saving their complex builds at all 'cause they can't rez them again, is somthing that has always been present and not a bug introduced in some more recent change?
@Dante Linden
Thank you for your suggestion. I do appreciate it. However, of course this will not resolve the real root issue. I find this problem to be catastrophic. I care more about this issue than I have about anything else in Second Life.. it is more critical than the "Open Space Sim gripes", the "Adult/Content Grid gripes" or when LL decided they needed to increase restrictions on an increased tier for the now Homestead sim.. I can go on but hopefully you get my drift. I simply do not undertand how Prospero Linden could make such a decision as this without first thinking how this will effect all of Second Life users and the ability to do what Torley Linden taught us as newbies with the edit tool, select my objects only, then drag and select all. That was and still is truly a wonderful, useful and much needed feature! Please, do not take it away from us. We need this. 4000L may sound good on paper but it is still not the same the as select all.. we would never be able to have that same security again knowing that we can simply drag and select without fear that we exceeded our prim limit, therefore, we need to group in sections or use a rezzer. Sometimes we need to simply be able to select all and take or move, etc. This does not only effect builders, but just your average SL user on a sandbox, or a sim, moving, archiving, etc.. and yes of course the builder as well. What's even worse is that the majority of Second Life users do not read the blog, forums or even know that such a thing called pjira exist. Most are also probably not aware of this issue. If they by mistake discovered it during their daily routine of building, archiving, etc.. they would think "oh bleep, LL did it to me again!" and go about their merry little way being totally upset with a nasty after taste in their mouth that LL did it to them again, without realizing that they have voice which can be articulate into a vote. I feel like sending this link to Phillip Rosedale or M Linden so that they can surely see how critical this is. I don't know what else to say other than please undo this decision and let us continue happily as we were with our normal building, moving archiving, etc. Thank you! Here's the KB article I mentioned:
https://support.secondlife.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=4417&task=knowledge&questionID=6425 Tigro, addressing the root cause of the issue would require changing old and fundamental pieces of the simulator: the pieces that manage object rezzing. The only somewhat-recent related changes I'm aware of have been a rez limit and now the prim limit, both of which are mentioned in that KB article. so if it is just due to concern of physical objects breaking apart while rezzing, only apply the limit to coalesced objects that contain at least one physical object, or even better, simply don't simulate any physics for a coalesced object until it is all rezzed
also, with so many issues, people are already used to have to do workarounds and avoid certain things, taking a field together with a physical ball would be avoided, either turn the ball non-phys, or have the field rez a new ball if no ball is around
edit:also, what happened to being in build mode to rez physical objects you don't wanna get loose? Isn't that common sense? And sim crossing, if your chair isn't linked to the rest of the boat, you're asking to have it move separatedly, usually even when the avatar is sitting in an object there is already the risk the avatar itself will be separated from the rest of the object during sim crossing. And anyone that has walked across a sim border over prims, unless only with builds that are made with the workaround to avoid the issue, knows that when crossing sim borders physics and collisions don't work well the explanations on that knowledge base entry seems to suggest this is just a bunch of solutions to problems that didn't exist causing real problems
get rid of the freezing sim, and get rid of the prim count limit, that should result in having less problems than what we have now, if you add up all problems that will be created by removing those non-features, subtract all problems that are caused by having them present, and combine with the problems that exist with or without them being present, the result is less problems than what we have now, I believe you won't even have to weight each individual problem solved by not having those two non-features to notice a clear benefit in not having them We are always being given new limits on things. What happened to Second Life's slogan? Is it even still there?
Stop to think about how to solve a problem before giving us a new one! Please, for once, just let our imagination actually run wild! Let it truly be our world and let our dreams and aspirations come to life! There is no need for this constant bickering over limits we do not need. Second Life was limited enough before this! I agree with wulfric chevalier on this matter, it would be both convenient for small builders and functional to large scale builders at the same time
Sorry for the dupe, didn't see this one popup after searching (https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-91
)
Anyways, I am seriously p-off because builders are very limited now, not just me but any builder that does bigger builds! So I ask LL, WTH are you doing this to yourselfs and your residents???? it simply makes no sense and its really messing up everything! Linden Labs, this is serious. PLEASE consider what you have done and remove the limit as soon as possible. Second Life is meant to be a place where we can let imagination run wild, but this limit only contradicts Second Life, and as long as it is here, people will leave because it is not a Second Life any more.
LL, when is this going to be resolved? I'm trying to finish a project i've been working on for months, and this stupid limit is stopping me from doing so.
The fact that you have lowered this limit to 1000 from 4000 just drives me insane, you can't make these changes all of a sudden without notice. I couldn't beleive my eyes when i tried to take a copy of my build and i got the 'Please select 1000 prims or less' message. You are treating us, the builders, like you dont care atall about us, you seem to be completley unaware that this limit is severley crippling us to say the least, but honestly - what happened to "Your World, Your Imagination"? That simply does not apply anymore because of this. I don't know about anybody else but it's making me wonder why i am paying $50 a month of Land Use Fee's when i am just getting stupid limits like this thrown upon us. If this issue does not get fully resovled soon, i see no reason for me to stay in SL as the only reason i play is to build. Please get rid of this issue, once and for all. Adam,
There are no plans to remove prim limits from coalesced objects. I could resolve this jira as "Wont Fix" if it would make that clearer. However, we didn't make any decision to adjust the prim limits back down to 1000, so I looked and found 190 hosts that had been down when the prim limit was updated to 4000 that are now back up and were running with the old limit. I've updated the prim limit on those hosts - thanks for bringing that up. If you think I am going to stop voting against this limit, you are gravely mistaken. I shall vote everywhere I can in order to ensure that limit is either removed or increased to a much higher number. I promise you, I shall not rest until I can build my ships again. That had better be understood, Dante.
Dante, thank you for finding out why some people, in some sims, were still encountering the 1000-prim limit.
The current 4000-prim limit isn't ideal, but most Builders can probably live with it. We may not like it, but can live with it. I will agree with Atop, however, that for some building projects, even a 4000-prim limit is an undesirable constraint. We really do need a decent way to take up and set out very large builds. If I was going to use a whole sim to make a single, detailed starship as a build, how could I do that with the 4K prim limit? The only way I can imagine it would be to use a rezzer system, like Builder's Buddy or Rez-Foo, to pack up the finished build. But while making it? You're working without a net, risking huge losses in time and effort if anything goes wrong before the completed build can be packed. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
Bug
Reopened
Major
Server 1.26.3.118580 : Limit of prims on coallesced objects makes dealing with full-sim builds IMPOSSIBLE
1000 prim limit is just silly. How can I pack up a sim or large single use build and move it now?
1000 prims is larger then most peoples prim limits anyway so this doesn't really help anyone but screws up everyone...
Revert now please!
Samantha