Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Why is the database so limited? Does it cost more money to get more database storage? If so why not just make it a paid feature to save worlds bigger than 300x300
Offline
It's a limitation of Player.IO itself, more specifically BigDB:
There are two limits associated with database objects that you should be aware of:
Keys of database objects must between one and 50 characters long, and only consist of word characters (no spaces, special characters).
You cannot save more than 500KB of data in a single database object.
A world is stored in a single database object, and any world larger than 300x300 will likely use more than 500 KB. It's a global limitation with no elegant way around it.
Offline
More database objects for a world or a new database?
Edit: BigDB is heterological.
Thank you eleizibeth ^
I stack my signatures rather than delete them so I don't lose them
Offline
This wouldn't be an issue if EE stored geometric shapes instead of block by block.
Offline
This is essentially solved by converting the rasterization of blocks to vectors, as Emalton stated.
Although, this could be temporarily solved by applying compression to the existing byte arrays of x/y/x1/y1 co-ordinates.
*u stinky*
Offline
what about creating 2+ objects for one level and have limit whatever staff say it is?
Offline
That would take 2+ times as long to load, and 2+ times the amount of storage.
Offline
Pages: 1
[ Started around 1713928860.7098 - Generated in 0.050 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.44 MiB (Peak: 1.55 MiB) ]