9 replies to this topic

[ElinKattunge]

Hello,
I was wondering if there are any plans to add rackmount computers to ComputerCraft, Data Center solutions are a good idea and it is ugly having computers with screens and no rackmounting solution saying around, they are bulky and use a lot of space.

I highly recommend that you add rackmount computers to ComputerCraft.

[Creator]

You could a data center by connecting a lot of disks with a single network cable. In this case only PC is necessary.

[HPWebcamAble]

ElinKattunge, on 11 January 2016 - 03:06 PM, said:

Hello,
Data Center solutions are a good idea and it is ugly having computers with screens and no rackmounting solution saying around, they are bulky and use a lot of space.

In real life, yes.

But this is Minecraft


You can run theoretically unlimited virtual computers from single block, if you are up to the task of writing some virtualization software in Lua

The main reason that server racks are used IRL is for additional computing power (or power focused in a certain area, like graphics for example)
However in ComputerCraft, each computer has the same speed, and only one computer can run at a time. Meaning more computers slows down other CC computers overall.

[wilcomega]

HPWebcamAble, on 13 January 2016 - 02:37 AM, said:

ElinKattunge, on 11 January 2016 - 03:06 PM, said:

Hello,
Data Center solutions are a good idea and it is ugly having computers with screens and no rackmounting solution saying around, they are bulky and use a lot of space.

In real life, yes.

But this is Minecraft


You can run theoretically unlimited virtual computers from single block, if you are up to the task of writing some virtualization software in Lua

The main reason that server racks are used IRL is for additional computing power (or power focused in a certain area, like graphics for example)
However in ComputerCraft, each computer has the same speed, and only one computer can run at a time. Meaning more computers slows down other CC computers overall.

exactly this, as far as i am aware cc does not use any threading for computers or any virtual hardware limitations for computers, which means like he said that CC computers always run at max speed and adding more running cc computers makes every single one slower

if CC 2.0 were to use virtual hardware limitations (which means limited ram / cpu cycles) it would be usefull to use a lot of computers to process large amounts of data for example
if CC 2.0 were to use threading it would mean that computers simply became more powerfull and windows / linux would take care of running the computers. althought i suspect this will not be implemented because using threads just raises a boat load more problems.

Edited by wilcomega, 14 January 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[Bomb Bloke]

Truth be told, ComputerCraft computers are threaded. They still don't run in true parallel, though, and I'd imagine that would be difficult to change. Also not really worthwhile, as the current system makes it difficult for ComputerCraft to overload the real-world CPUs of Minecraft servers.

CC 2.0 is unlikely to offer more than one "system" per instance you run, so I'd imagine it's a moot point there.

[ElinKattunge]

Ah, okay thanks! I have an ME datacenter but wanted to span out with computers. I guess I will look into using ComputerCraft as a Data Center solution in the future. Thank you very much guys!

[Lemmmy]

Eliminating the idea of multithreading, a peripheral for multiple computers in one block could be interesting. A networking cable would link all the computers to the network. Then the programmer could simply distribute the load between the computers.

[braydenq6]

Rack mounts are avaliable in opencomputer's

[Dragon53535]

Lemmmy, on 17 January 2016 - 01:15 AM, said:

Eliminating the idea of multithreading, a peripheral for multiple computers in one block could be interesting. A networking cable would link all the computers to the network. Then the programmer could simply distribute the load between the computers.

The thing is, there is no load at all. Each computer in the world runs in sequence, so when one computer is running, every other one is off, or waiting for an event. Why use multiple computers, for something one can do at no cost to speed.

[wilcomega]

Dragon53535, on 20 January 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

Lemmmy, on 17 January 2016 - 01:15 AM, said:

Eliminating the idea of multithreading, a peripheral for multiple computers in one block could be interesting. A networking cable would link all the computers to the network. Then the programmer could simply distribute the load between the computers.

The thing is, there is no load at all. Each computer in the world runs in sequence, so when one computer is running, every other one is off, or waiting for an event. Why use multiple computers, for something one can do at no cost to speed.

And that is why i like openComputers, limited clockspeed and memory, there you accually have a reason to have more computers or more powerfull hardware, but thats beside the point

Edited by wilcomega, 20 January 2016 - 01:09 PM.