Would you donate for a faster, better server?

General Comments, Questions about all things OmnipotentS that don't go in other topics/forums

Would you be willing to donate more for a better server

Poll ended at Sat Mar 18, 2023 12:41 pm

Hell no, I am a leech
0
No votes
Yes, can give at least $20 year
4
29%
Yes, I can give $50 or more a year
9
64%
Yes, I am a bigballer and would bank roll at least half a year or more..
1
7%
 
Total votes: 14

User avatar
captainsnarf
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:51 pm
Location: Washington
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes
Contact:

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by captainsnarf »

snake98 wrote: Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:10 am Where do you see the nodes constructed and destroyed at?
https://www.omnipotents.com/utstats/mat ... match=3384
FuriousRabbit
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2022 12:28 am

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by FuriousRabbit »

Yes at $50, but is a dedicated server worth it? I'm guessing there is contention somewhere in the network stack. Might not even be on the node. Snarf mentioned seeing much better performance on Landlords vs NFO which originated the tests with Roger's server. There are other weird things, like a mention in another thread that clients communicate with the server at the frame rate. If that's true, a high frame rate can DDOS the server, although I assume it intelligently drops surplus packets. Another question, is the server code multithreaded?
User avatar
Anonymous.
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2021 10:54 pm

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by Anonymous. »

No it's not multithreaded, and the current CPU can't handle the load. It requires brute force single threaded performance, which costs $$$$$$$$$$$$ if you're not hosting it yourself.
User avatar
captainsnarf
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:51 pm
Location: Washington
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes
Contact:

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by captainsnarf »

Landlords *is* NFO also. I was wrong. It's weird it doesn't respond to ping like HoC and Omni do, but doing net traces it is definitely NFO.

Framerate is limited by your netspeed. Omni caps the netspeed at 13600. That means 13.6Kb/s * 32 players = 435.2Kb/s bandwidth requirements. The max netspeed the game supports is 20000, so 640Kb/s. Any reasonable network should be able to handle this game. When we were testing CEONSS dedicated linux server I ran a network monitor and bandwidth usage was pretty low.

Another factor is the server tick rate. 13600 = 13.6Kb/s when the tick rate is 30. Increase the tick rate and you increase the bandwidth requirements.

Everything in the game that goes over the network has a network priority. These are all sorted by priority each tick before being sent out the network. If there's not enough bandwidth or cpu time to process everything, lower items in the priority get dropped. This is why you might see missing tank turrets or link gun beams when the server is overloaded. A detailed description of UT2004 netcode can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KGL ... q6LPY/edit#


The server is NOT multithreaded.
User avatar
pooty
Posts: 4354
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2021 10:22 am
Location: Michigan
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by pooty »

I capped at 13600, because faster netspeeds aren't going to do much except put more strain on the server.
https://www.utzone.de/forum/showthread.php?t=4326

And any fps over 205 isn't really necessary, you can run those locally, but we don't need you swamping the server for frames you probably can't even display -- monitor refresh matters if you at 144hz, your monitor will show max 144 fps.

We run the tick rate at 28. Higher Tick rates really drive up CPU. Every actor (player, vehicle, etc) usually has "tick" function that runs every tick. Vehicles can be pretty tick heavy vs other things.

What we wanted to test out one night either on Roger's or Anon's server was if we had dedicated fast CPU, does it run similarly to NFO, meaning we had an engine limitation, vs CPU limitation.
COLDCUT
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2022 5:15 pm

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by COLDCUT »

poof
Last edited by COLDCUT on Sun Mar 12, 2023 12:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
captainsnarf
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:51 pm
Location: Washington
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes
Contact:

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by captainsnarf »

NFO sucks. You hit that guy with triple rox to the face and nothing happened.

omni, hosted at NFO in chicago
Image

hoc, hosted at NFO in chicago
Image

Look at those big lag spikes. And that's at 4am. It's not really NFO's fault though. Their ISP sucks. The average latency is OK but consistency is not very good.
User avatar
pooty
Posts: 4354
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2021 10:22 am
Location: Michigan
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by pooty »

Those routes are different: beNNNN.ccrNN are all different machines, that could account for different latency.
I guess Cogent isn't good? https://cogentco.com/en/

And none of that routing mess would be mitigated by a private server, you'd still have the same issue.

But we are back to the point where we need to test the server on dedicated, faster hardware, I don't think we are going to be able to do much with ISP routing.
User avatar
captainsnarf
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2021 1:51 pm
Location: Washington
Server Sponsor: Yes
Server Admin: Yes
Contact:

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by captainsnarf »

Those graphs are from pingplotter.

Maybe some others can try from their locations and share pics?
User avatar
Anonymous.
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2021 10:54 pm

Re: Would you donate for a faster, better server?

Post by Anonymous. »

Apart from the third hop (probably throttles icmp) it looks ok. In-game ping settled at 48 with an empty server just now. Think I get ~60 with more players.
Attachments
Untitled-1.png
Untitled-1.png (81.72 KiB) Viewed 1861 times
Post Reply