|
Home > Archive > Macromedia Flash Server > April 2005 > Is there any limit on number of connections?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Is there any limit on number of connections?
|
|
| Michael Klishin 2005-04-16, 8:45 pm |
| Hi list,
Is there any limit on number of connected users in FCS? We're need to
make a broadcast system for around 3000 thousands users (one broadcaster
and thousands of viewers). Is it possible in any way?
Any help appriciated, thanks in advance.
---
Michael Klishin
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Bill Sanders 2005-04-17, 2:45 am |
| Michael,
Here's the URL for FCS pricing and user limit:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/...ctinfo/pricing/
The closest to what you need is the Professional version which allows
2,500 users.
Developer Edition
Maximum kilobits per second
Maximum Connections
Price
Expiration
250
5
Free
Never
Personal Edition
Maximum Megabits per second
Maximum Connections
Price
Expiration
1
50
$499
Never
Professional Edition
Maximum Megabits per second
Maximum Connections
Price
Expiration
10
2,500
$4,500
Never
90 Day Unlimited Capacity Pack
Maximum Megabits per second
Maximum Connections
Price
Expiration
Unlimited
Unlimited
$7,500
90 days
HTH,
Bill
On Apr 16, 2005, at 9:11 PM, Michael Klishin wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Is there any limit on number of connected users in FCS? We're need to
> make a broadcast system for around 3000 thousands users (one
> broadcaster and thousands of viewers). Is it possible in any way?
>
> Any help appriciated, thanks in advance.
>
> ---
>
> Michael Klishin
>
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
>
bill sanders | www.sandlight.com | bloomfield, ct | 860-242-2260
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Simon Lord 2005-04-17, 2:45 am |
| > 2,500 users.
Connections. 2500 users would be awesome. I think just 8 users in a
room is 64 connections, then on top of that throw in SO's which (I
believe) are counted as connections as well and you can run out pretty
quick even with 2500. Although I've only ever hit the BW limit so far.
Even if the BW was unlimited it wouldn't help me much as my BW is
capped at 12.5 by my provider.
Sincerely,
Simon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Ingle Interactive, Inc. 2005-04-17, 2:45 am |
| Really? I used to think that, but then when I started looking at code I
started thinking otherwise. If that is true then that is really
disappointing. I was making my new assumption based on the nc.connect type
code that is creating 1 connection per user. Then all objects are passed
along that connection. Right? Or no? Now I'm really confused. I figured
it's 1 connection per user unless you implicitly open a new (2nd or more)
connection for the same user. Time to crack the documents back open.
Gary Ingle
-----Original Message-----
From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
[mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Simon Lord
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2005 11:52 PM
To: FlashComm Mailing List
Subject: Re: [FlashComm] Is there any limit on number of connections?
> 2,500 users.
Connections. 2500 users would be awesome. I think just 8 users in a
room is 64 connections, then on top of that throw in SO's which (I
believe) are counted as connections as well and you can run out pretty
quick even with 2500. Although I've only ever hit the BW limit so far.
Even if the BW was unlimited it wouldn't help me much as my BW is
capped at 12.5 by my provider.
Sincerely,
Simon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Bill Sanders 2005-04-17, 7:45 am |
| Simon,
The question was about a 1-many app, and so you do not get the
exponential multiplication of streams -- you were talking about streams
and not connections in your reference to 8 users and 64 "connections."
In a 1 to many application, you have the number of streams based on the
number of subscribers. So, 3,000 subscribers would be 3,000 streams,
and not 3,000 squared! Likewise, you can have all of the RSO's you want
and not affect the number of connections you're allowed as far as the
license is concerned; however, you're going to start jamming up the
queues and increase the latency quickly with a large number of RSO's.
You are right, though, about running out of BW before connection
capacity. With 3,000 (or even 2,500) subscribers, each stream is going
to have to be no more than (#of users / BW ceiling). So with 2,500
connections each stream could be no more than 4k, which probably means
that you're limited to text streams.
One alternative a number of people on this list have suggested for
1-many apps is Windows Media player. While unable to perform a number
of functions found in FCS, WMP's server apparently is very good when it
comes to 1-many apps. The server is included as standard with the
Windows 2003 server, but I haven't tried it yet. On a project we're
working on now, we may be forced to do so because our 1-many app will
probably only be able to serve 40-50 using a broadcast of a recorded
FLV file in 240 x 180 format. Even if we drop it down to 160 X 120,
we're not going to be able to go much beyond 50-60 simultaneous
connections.
Kindest regards,
Bill
On Apr 17, 2005, at 12:51 AM, Simon Lord wrote:
>
> Connections. 2500 users would be awesome. I think just 8 users in a
> room is 64 connections, then on top of that throw in SO's which (I
> believe) are counted as connections as well and you can run out pretty
> quick even with 2500. Although I've only ever hit the BW limit so
> far. Even if the BW was unlimited it wouldn't help me much as my BW
> is capped at 12.5 by my provider.
>
> Sincerely,
> Simon
>
>
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
>
bill sanders | www.sandlight.com | bloomfield, ct | 860-242-2260
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| hank williams 2005-04-17, 5:45 pm |
| Yeah, I would agree with Bill. Macromedia has really priced themselves
out of the one to many business (and others). For live events windows
media or real seems like the way to go.
For on demand applications, I strongly recommend using progressive
download vs. streaming. Progressive download means you can use one or
a cluster of web servers (free) to distribute your content instead of
a $4500 per server solution.
In terms of media distribution, the only justifiable application for
flashcomm is anything that involves live small groups (virtual meeting
rooms) or person to person communication. Basically, only use
flashcomm for, anything that is not one to many, and/or anything
involving a webcam. Even with a webcam, if its not live you can record
and then use progressive download to distribute.
Regards
Hank
On 4/17/05, Bill Sanders <wdsanders-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Simon,
>=20
> The question was about a 1-many app, and so you do not get the
> exponential multiplication of streams -- you were talking about streams
> and not connections in your reference to 8 users and 64 "connections."
> In a 1 to many application, you have the number of streams based on the
> number of subscribers. So, 3,000 subscribers would be 3,000 streams,
> and not 3,000 squared! Likewise, you can have all of the RSO's you want
> and not affect the number of connections you're allowed as far as the
> license is concerned; however, you're going to start jamming up the
> queues and increase the latency quickly with a large number of RSO's.
>=20
> You are right, though, about running out of BW before connection
> capacity. With 3,000 (or even 2,500) subscribers, each stream is going
> to have to be no more than (#of users / BW ceiling). So with 2,500
> connections each stream could be no more than 4k, which probably means
> that you're limited to text streams.
>=20
> One alternative a number of people on this list have suggested for
> 1-many apps is Windows Media player. While unable to perform a number
> of functions found in FCS, WMP's server apparently is very good when it
> comes to 1-many apps. The server is included as standard with the
> Windows 2003 server, but I haven't tried it yet. On a project we're
> working on now, we may be forced to do so because our 1-many app will
> probably only be able to serve 40-50 using a broadcast of a recorded
> FLV file in 240 x 180 format. Even if we drop it down to 160 X 120,
> we're not going to be able to go much beyond 50-60 simultaneous
> connections.
>=20
> Kindest regards,
> Bill
>=20
> On Apr 17, 2005, at 12:51 AM, Simon Lord wrote:
>=20
> bill sanders | www.sandlight.com | bloomfield, ct | 860-242-2260
>=20
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =3D-----------------------------------------------------------
>=20
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Simon Lord 2005-04-17, 5:45 pm |
| > The question was about a 1-many app, and so you do not get the
> exponential multiplication of streams -- you were talking about
> streams and not connections in your reference to 8 users and 64
> "connections."
Ahhh, gotcha. Although I fail to see the reason to use FCS as a chat
application only or as a 1 to many solution.
As for 1 to many (to chime in on with the WMP suggestions), Apple also
has a solution and can be viewed by anyone on a Mac, PC or Linux
system. Whether it's free or not is beyond me, although I was able to
download everything I need to get it running. You can get the server
for OSX, Darwin, Redhat, Solaris AND Windows from here:
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/streaming/
.... more info.
STREAMING SERVER:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/products/qtss/
BROADCASTER:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/products/broadcaster/
.... now if only Apple would wrap an authoring environment IDE around
Quicktime and stick AppleScript in it we'd be all set.
Sincerely,
Simon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Simon Lord 2005-04-17, 5:45 pm |
| Oh, and it's Open Source for those of you who may gloss over the link
without actually going there.
On Apr 17, 2005, at 2:01 PM, Simon Lord wrote:
>
> Ahhh, gotcha. Although I fail to see the reason to use FCS as a chat
> application only or as a 1 to many solution.
>
> As for 1 to many (to chime in on with the WMP suggestions), Apple also
> has a solution and can be viewed by anyone on a Mac, PC or Linux
> system. Whether it's free or not is beyond me, although I was able to
> download everything I need to get it running. You can get the server
> for OSX, Darwin, Redhat, Solaris AND Windows from here:
>
> http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/streaming/
>
> ... more info.
>
> STREAMING SERVER:
> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/products/qtss/
>
> BROADCASTER:
> http://www.apple.com/quicktime/products/broadcaster/
>
> ... now if only Apple would wrap an authoring environment IDE around
> Quicktime and stick AppleScript in it we'd be all set.
>
> Sincerely,
> Simon
>
>
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
>
Sincerely,
Simon
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
| |
| Stefan Richter 2005-04-17, 5:45 pm |
| Not sure if it was mentioned but RSO's do not count as connections by
themselves, only Netconnections do (and you access an RSO over a NC). You
can access many RSOs over a single NC. Open 2 NCs and you lose 2 connections
against your license and so on.
Stefan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org
> [mailto:flashcomm-bounces-1Ss2GqJETD3yZ38Mhd3e/9ZfFG6BLHNm@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of
> Simon Lord
> Sent: 17 April 2005 19:04
> To: FlashComm Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [FlashComm] Is there any limit on number of connections?
>
> Oh, and it's Open Source for those of you who may gloss over
> the link without actually going there.
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2005, at 2:01 PM, Simon Lord wrote:
>
> as a chat
> Apple also
> was able to
> the server
> IDE around
> Sincerely,
> Simon
>
>
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
> Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
> =-----------------------------------------------------------
>
> To change your subscription options or search the archive:
> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
>
=-----------------------------------------------------------
Supported by Fig Leaf Software - http://www.figleaf.com
=-----------------------------------------------------------
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcomm
|
|
|
|
|