<div>You can see the overview at the CS client page <A
href="http://www.clanservers.net/clients.asp">http://www.clanservers.net/clients.asp</A>.
We're in the second group "Game Servers by the Box at L33tgames." We
have a rather special relationship with CS because we've been with them
since the beginning and we do a lot of beta work for them. Except for
initial install we maintain all our game servers ourselves (which
is rather unique in the game server business) via telnet. Each game has
it's own user account and the game itself is running in its own
Screen. We use Apache to serve up player stats
and overall stats.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>You can see our specific server stats at <A
href="http://washington.clanservers.net/">http://washington.clanservers.net/</A>.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>As for the tuning. Indeed we have spent a lot of time tuning specific
apps and the 15k vs. 25k max_rates per client are a tradeoff between
individual player performance and overall system performance. We were
encountering the same sort of cross-server interference
(lag) problems that you mentioned. It was solved through a
combination of nice settings (match servers -15, public servers -10,
custom map servers -5, telnet sessions 0) and the per seat throttling.
The throttling is different for each game type because WET for instance
chokes at 15k but is quite responsive at 25k. SOF2 on the
other hand is tolerable at 8k. Each game will use the full
per player BW limit. The upper limit is of course the total BW limit
set by the connect contract. When we blow our monthly allotment, which
we have done when all games were running full BW, the connect
overcharge is a killer. The decision to use one IP per game with
consecutive port numbers for instances is somewhat arbitrary, however,
we do run from a single master install per game and symlink all common
files into the instances. There is really only one COD:UO
"install" with 3 symlinked instances. That way we only patch in one
place per game.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In fact all servers are running simultaneously (plus a 16 man
SOF2 server we sublet) and we rarely encounter any cross-game lag
anymore. Of course the match servers are not normally populated but the
others are. We have had AA, BF1942 and BF:V servers in the mix at one
time or another as well.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Wheu, this was rather long winded, but I hope it helps.<BR>Dave</div>
<div><BR>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE: [cod] Multiple
service server + Going off list due to <BR>"spamming"<BR>From: "Mark J.
DeFilippis" <defilm@acm.org><BR>Date: Fri, December 03, 2004 4:46
am<BR>To: cod@icculus.org<BR><BR><BR>What nifty utility are U using to
format that nice output list<BR>or is that a flat file, or you use
command line args with a<BR>ps -el | <perl script, sed, awk,
etc>?<BR><BR><BR>On a Dual Pent 4, 3.2Ghz HT, 2GB Ram, 100Mbs, (6
IP's) when my<BR>UO foy 24x7 fills up with 32 users (No limits on tanks
or etc. It<BR>is Ladder compliant), ONE cpu runs at 60-80% (Combined
Real<BR>and Virtual).<BR><BR>I have 24 Man Rifles Only server running,
and a BF1942 server<BR>32 user. The UO Rifles only will Lag if the
BF1942 server and<BR>32 user FOY fill up. Of course they get really
ticked off in the<BR>rifles only server, as the most skill is indeed
required there...<BR>(You have a bolt action rifle, or you can bash the
guy. No scopes,<BR>smg's, nades (except smoke)). So if they get
lag, it can be<BR>pretty tough to hit a target, and becomes VERY
frustrating<BR>quickly..<BR><BR>I presume all these are not actually
running at the same time?<BR>Also, I noticed some of your Max_rates are
at 25K, some 15K.<BR>I never noticed much of a difference between 15K
and 25K? But<BR>then again, I have not run as many virtual servers as
you are.<BR>I ask, because if you set them lower, I presume you did so
for<BR>a reason, or computed them and hence 15K vs default
25K?<BR><BR>If you don't mind, can you tell us about this
server?<BR><BR>Physical... <BR>Your normal utilization?
Peak utilization?<BR>Limiting Mods?<BR><BR>I think the information
could be insightful, certainly for me<BR>simply by the fact that when
the UO server is full and the<BR>BF1942 are full, there is hardly any
CPU left...<BR><BR>Thanks<BR><BR>Mark<BR><BR><BR><BR>At 11:54 PM
12/2/2004, you wrote:<BR></div>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT:
blue 2px solid">
<BLOCKQUOTE class=cite cite="" type="cite">You can do a similar setup
using virtual IPs and assigning each game its own<BR>IP. Of
course you need to "own" the IP you are assigning. If you only
have<BR>access to one IP then assigning the games different ports is
the way to go.<BR><BR>Donovan<BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: David A. Fuess [<A href="mailto:david@fuess.net"
eudora="autourl">mailto:david@fuess.net</A>]<BR>Sent: Thursday,
December 02, 2004 2:27 PM<BR>To: cod@icculus.org<BR>Subject: Re: [cod]
Multiple service server + Going off list due to<BR>"spamming"<BR><BR>I
run 3 UO servers on one machine along with several other game
types<BR>(1-UT2k4, 3-SOF2, 3-WET, 3 COD:UO, 1-CSS)<BR><BR>Team Judge
UT2004 67.18.122.226 7777 10000 24 8 ut4s xCTFGame CTF-SMOTE<BR>Team
Judge Public CTF 67.18.122.226 20100 15000 30 0 sof2s ctf
mp_kam4<BR>Team Judge Public Custom 67.18.122.226 20200 15000 30 0
sof2s ctf mp_Italy3<BR>Team Judge L337 Match Server 67.18.122.226 20300
10000 20 0 sof2s ctf<BR>arioche/mp_small<BR>Team Judge 9 Map Campaign
ETPro 3.0 67.18.122.227 27960 25000 28 1 ets et<BR>supplydepot<BR>Team
Judge Custom/Stock 67.18.122.227 27961 100000 28 0 ets et oasis<BR>Team
Judge Match Server 67.18.122.227 27962 15000 18 0 ets et battery<BR>Team
Judge L337 COD/UO Server 67.18.122.228 28960 25000 24 5 cods
tdm<BR>mp_saint-rush<BR>Team Judge L337 COD/UO CTF-HQ 67.18.122.228
28961 25000 24 0 cods ctf<BR>mp_cassino<BR>Team Judge L337 COD/UO Match
67.18.122.228 28962 25000 24 0 cods dom<BR>mp_arnhem<BR>Team Judge L337
HL2 CS 67.18.122.229 27015 - 24 0 hl2s cs_italy<BR><BR>You see the
three UO servers are on ports 28960, 28961, and 28962. Each<BR>game is
a separate install on Linux so the connection is defined
uniquely<BR>for each.<BR><BR>Dave<BR><BR>At 01:46 PM 12/2/2004, you
wrote:<BR>> People
are so sensitive. Ever hear of filters? This is
nothing<BR>> compared to many many other
list.<BR>><BR>><BR>>Anyway, to bring this back to
on-topic.<BR>><BR>>I stumbled across one message here that
mentioned running multiple servers<BR>>on one machine. I
assume you must set different port numbers for them.<BR>><BR>>Can
you run one as internet and the other as LAN?<BR>><BR>>I would
also assume that the bandwidth calculations applies to
both<BR>>servers combined as well, correct?<BR>><BR>>So if I
had a Pentium III 550 running Slackware Linux and it has 100
BaseT<BR>>connection to the world, my limitation would be the
processing power of<BR>>that machine?<BR>><BR>>It would also
seem like CoD would do a lot of repetitive commands (on
the<BR>>programming level) that a processor with a large cache would
be<BR>>best. Since AMD processors usually handle the repetitive
commands better<BR>>than Intel, would it not make more sense to run
an AMD processor?<BR>><BR>>Has anyone ran a Quake II server along
side a CoD?<BR>><BR>>Thanks<BR>></BLOCKQUOTE><X-SIGSEP>
<div></X-SIGSEP><TT>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Mark
J.
DeFilippis
defilm@acm.org<BR>
defilm@ieee.org<BR><BR><BR></div></BLOCKQUOTE></TT>