You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi,
I just added the mod to my map to replace robots.
I have 3 or 4 logistic networks. All except one are very small (10 roboports, 200 robots).
The biggest one has roughly 1k roboports and ~20k robots. Immediately without placing a chest the UPS dropped by 4.
After placing a chest the UPS stayed the same.
I therefore assume that the performance bottleneck is in the initial loop construct where you build a map of the existing networks.
Question: Do you think it is possible to persist the map between ticks?
Also the multiplication in the on tick event seems to be unnecessary, maybe this is also a small improvement.
What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
An additional idea:
would it be possible to put filters on all roboports to deny landing of certain types of robots?
Then the AI pathfinding could do the job and redirect all robots to the only "free" roboport, which is the chest. (I don't know enough about the logistics API yet to make a PR on my own right now :/ )
Hi,
I just added the mod to my map to replace robots.
I have 3 or 4 logistic networks. All except one are very small (10 roboports, 200 robots).
The biggest one has roughly 1k roboports and ~20k robots. Immediately without placing a chest the UPS dropped by 4.
After placing a chest the UPS stayed the same.
I therefore assume that the performance bottleneck is in the initial loop construct where you build a map of the existing networks.
Question: Do you think it is possible to persist the map between ticks?
Also the multiplication in the on tick event seems to be unnecessary, maybe this is also a small improvement.
What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: