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
If a WR run is sudennly worth 0 points, there is currently no good way to remove it from the game search.
It can happen for a variety of reasons listed under step 1 in the readme. For some of them we have obtained the leaderboard data. If it's WR and worth 0 I can just request the DB for deletion (it shouldn't hit the DB too much I think).
However it's not as simple when we discarded a run early, such as when it falls under 1m.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is that to improve performance and lessen the load on the srcom api?
There are a lot of highly contested IL's that are shorter than 1 minute and that change would cause IL hunters to lose a majority of their points.
Full game runs under a minute are excluded yes, to improve performance and lessen the load on SRC, as you said. (see the last point of step 1 in the Readme.md)
ILs are affected differently, since they're already worth a fraction of a run ("the quantity of ILs for the game + 1", ie if there's 5 ILs, it's worth 1/6). I've decided the the minimum time should follow the same rule: 1/6h of 1 minute -> 10s). So only runs that are way, way too short are afftected. (see step 8)
Avasam
changed the title
Automatic cleanup of runs under 1 minute
Automatic cleanup of invalid WRs in Game Search tool
Sep 4, 2020
If a WR run is sudennly worth 0 points, there is currently no good way to remove it from the game search.
It can happen for a variety of reasons listed under step 1 in the readme. For some of them we have obtained the leaderboard data. If it's WR and worth 0 I can just request the DB for deletion (it shouldn't hit the DB too much I think).
However it's not as simple when we discarded a run early, such as when it falls under 1m.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: