![Cleeus[JgKdo]](/data/avatars/s/30/30543.jpg?1424422840){kind=avatar}
INF2.9 Server load
- Thread starter Cleeus[JgKdo]
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Never saw that nearly that high on the beta box with that many on and it's a lesser box and I kept a really close eye on it. What sort of options are you running? Is the detonating ammo turned on?
Same with C22 server, P3 1,2 Gig, Win2k, CPU is maxed out with 8 players. This same server worked fine with 12 players on 2.86. Any other tweaks than turning detonating ammo off? We have shellcasinglifespan on 1 sec on the server.
Last edited:
sublime said:
Well, i saw it - on Belfast with 13 players we had semi in full-auto (which is a sign for 100% CPU usage), Beppo was playing with us too that day. Unfortunatly noone knew the specs of the server.
lol
Last edited:
AFA seems to hold out quite well with 20 people on it. Maybe you could ask Lightfighter for help.
Um, no need to be rude Cleeus or imply that I am lying. I'll remember that. The issue that day was most likely a large file transfer on that box or something else maxing out the CPU. I spent 30 minutes a day going over the CPU usage log on that box after every single testing session, so please don't infer things you know absolutely nothing about. Thank you.
The only time our CPU on the beta box hit that high was during the UT DDoS attacks. Other than that, we peaked at 80-85% during huge maps after 2-5 hours of playing.
On Wednesday we had about 88% CPU Usage on Server_[FOOL] with activated leaning and about 14-16 players. (AMD Athlon XP 2000+, 512 MB RAM, Linux)
The F6-pings were going about 400-500, when we deactivated leaning, the pings were about 100-150.
But with deactivated leaning we take away a base feature of Infiltration.
The F6-pings were going about 400-500, when we deactivated leaning, the pings were about 100-150.
But with deactivated leaning we take away a base feature of Infiltration.
Had our server's host monitor system usage last night with 16 players and here's what they've come up with :
Server is a 2.4GHz Dual-Xeon with lots of RAM.
For the germans :
"ich kann Sie beruhigen Ihr Server zieht maximal 8% CPU Leistung auf unserem
Server bei 16 Spielern. Von daher kann das Problem nicht durch die Hardware
verursacht werden, sonder eher denke ich ein Software / Map Problem. Die
Maschine lief gestern zu Peak Zeiten an 70% CPU Leistung, was ein völlig
normaler Wert darstellt."
For the non-germans :
"I hope this helps, your server is going at around 8% CPU load when at 16 players. So, the problem can't be the hardware, I'd rather suspect the Software/Map being the problem. Even at peak times the overall serverload was around 70% CPU load, which is quite a satifactory value."
We did disable all drops and explosive things. But leaning and always relevant was on. Of course. If we'd switch it of we'd no longer need the server...
This seems to prove that at least the main INF features eat servers for lunch.
Server is a 2.4GHz Dual-Xeon with lots of RAM.
For the germans :
"ich kann Sie beruhigen Ihr Server zieht maximal 8% CPU Leistung auf unserem
Server bei 16 Spielern. Von daher kann das Problem nicht durch die Hardware
verursacht werden, sonder eher denke ich ein Software / Map Problem. Die
Maschine lief gestern zu Peak Zeiten an 70% CPU Leistung, was ein völlig
normaler Wert darstellt."
For the non-germans :
"I hope this helps, your server is going at around 8% CPU load when at 16 players. So, the problem can't be the hardware, I'd rather suspect the Software/Map being the problem. Even at peak times the overall serverload was around 70% CPU load, which is quite a satifactory value."
We did disable all drops and explosive things. But leaning and always relevant was on. Of course. If we'd switch it of we'd no longer need the server...
This seems to prove that at least the main INF features eat servers for lunch.
Let me also add, that for the duration of the "monitoring" which we'd planned to have the server as full as possible. That pings, and lag were quite poor throughout for all concerned. Mostly it seemed to be map specific with certain maps ie Belfast being pretty much unplayable (400 pings- bolt action MP5's etc) to other maps being only slightly worse than we'd expect (pings 120-200 instead of 40-100).
This was the case for all players on the server, who were pretty much spread throughout Europe and the server based in Germany. From the UK, the 2.86 ping to our servers in the past has been (excepting problems at my end) around 50-90.
This was the case for all players on the server, who were pretty much spread throughout Europe and the server based in Germany. From the UK, the 2.86 ping to our servers in the past has been (excepting problems at my end) around 50-90.
I was also there at that time, Border town was completely unplayable, 500-600 ping, Iraq 300-350. I think the 400 barrier makes automatic guns go semi and that aint very playable anymore... Then smaller maps that server handles very nicely. There are some thoughts of the helicopters and other stuff like that adding to the cpu usage? Can team say if those could be the reason?
Then smaller maps that server handles very nicely. There are some thoughts of the helicopters and other stuff like that adding to the cpu usage? Can team say if those could be the reason?
It's mostly the number of movers causing the issues you're seeing. Think about the maps you're talking about and the number of doors there. The UT engine chokes on them for some reason. We cut out many of them on both maps to help performance, but there's only so much you can pare out of a map before it becomes lame. BorderTown wouldn't be nearly as much fun as it is if every door were open all the time, now would it?
Belfast is the same. There are tons of doors you can open and close and those are tough on the engine for some reason, especially online with the replication involved.
So, in short, it's mostly the movers.
Belfast is the same. There are tons of doors you can open and close and those are tough on the engine for some reason, especially online with the replication involved.
So, in short, it's mostly the movers.
Why the bad feeling? Very, very few maps have or need the extreme number of movers those maps have. Seriously, how many opening doors do you see on the majority of maps out there? 5? 10? Those numbers are more than fine for performance. It's just the ones that have a ton that are a problem and those are exceedingly rare even with maps that are huge. I can't recall the exact number that Epic says the engine will be ok with, but it's pretty high (60? 80?)
The maps we included with those large numbers of mover work fine with a few fewer players and we couldn't justify leaving them out really as they're impressive maps. It's just the replication needed to send the information about the state of every mover that causes issues at times.
So unless you have 100 doors and 30 choppers flying around, you should be just fine.
The maps we included with those large numbers of mover work fine with a few fewer players and we couldn't justify leaving them out really as they're impressive maps. It's just the replication needed to send the information about the state of every mover that causes issues at times.
So unless you have 100 doors and 30 choppers flying around, you should be just fine.
Reality IS that either there's gonna be none of those maps in high playernumber servers' rotations or no servers with 16 players for those maps.
I know that is not the end of the world, but a pity nonetheless.
I just hope the community will manage to find the right mix of available servers, both large maps + few players and small maps + many players servers...
Actually I think we should also make a Map-Number-Of-Movers table to assist getting playable rotations done without testing every single map at 16.
I know that is not the end of the world, but a pity nonetheless.
I just hope the community will manage to find the right mix of available servers, both large maps + few players and small maps + many players servers...
Actually I think we should also make a Map-Number-Of-Movers table to assist getting playable rotations done without testing every single map at 16.
/bump/
Is there anything anyone can do or add? Half the maps in the rotation are grinding servers in Europe to a halt. Dunno about Springer land but on this side of the pond were strugglin. Heeyyyylp!
Is there anything anyone can do or add? Half the maps in the rotation are grinding servers in Europe to a halt. Dunno about Springer land but on this side of the pond were strugglin. Heeyyyylp!
monkey_hanger said:/bump/
Is there anything anyone can do or add? Half the maps in the rotation are grinding servers in Europe to a halt. Dunno about Springer land but on this side of the pond were strugglin. Heeyyyylp!
Another thing where the server can be tweaked is the HBFizFrequency
It's the frequency (in Hz = 1/s) with which the players positions are forced to be transmitted. We set it to 2 on our servers so that it will be update every half second.