Does anyone know roughly how many kb/s each client connected to a COD 4 server uses? Is it a fairly average sustained usage?<br><br>I'm looking at approx numbers so I can calculate.<br><br>Maybe someone has some MRTG/Cacti stats or something similar online?
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 7, 2007 8:27 AM, <<a href="mailto:email@heiwu.de">email@heiwu.de</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
As this is is going to be my first gameserver ever, i have zero experience<br>with that. My Brother told me, CoD4 Maps are HUGE in RAM, so i was feared<br>if my 2 GB were enough. Thanks to this list (which is really active
<br>*thumbs up*) i am all pleased and can't wait to install my server.<br><br>Now, knowing that my server can handle CoD4:<br>"see any true traffic analysis of a COD4 server" this could get the next<br>possible bottleneck. Does anybody already have some stats he would like to
<br>share with us? I'd be really interested in that!<br><br>In my Server offer (<a href="http://www.hetzner.de/rootserver_en.html" target="_blank">http://www.hetzner.de/rootserver_en.html</a> /<br><a href="http://www.hetzner.de/rootserver.html" target="_blank">
http://www.hetzner.de/rootserver.html</a>) it says it has a 1Gbit NIC on a<br>100Mbit Network.<br>After some eMails with my provider, they told me, i'd have to share<br>100Mbit/s with 6 other machines. Means, if my rack neighbour runs a
<br>bittorrent DL server, my connection's all f***ed up! ;)<br><br>That's the theory so far. I think i'll make some bandwidth performance<br>tests once i have my server!<br><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">
<br>> Georgecooldude wrote:<br>><br>>> What do you think would run on a 2.4ghz quad core xeon and 4-5gb ram?<br>>> 80gb 10,000rpm drive on 100mbit connection?<br>><br>> Too many people ask this question for me not to put my nose directly
<br>> into it... here goes.<br>><br>> As with my day job, these questions can't really be answered without<br>> knowing a lot more about the environment. Yes, lots of things depend on<br>> CPU, disk, ram, etc. but your network connection is much more important.
<br>><br>> I have yet to see any true traffic analysis of a COD4 server, so I can't<br>> tell you how many instances you could run over a true 100mbit LAN<br>> connection.<br>><br>> When people say "I have a 100mbit connection", that's all well and good,
<br>> as that is what you have decided to pay for.<br>><br>> I doubt, however, that your provider gives you that full 100mbit to the<br>> outside world.<br>><br>> Take as an example, my house. I have a gigabit switch between some
<br>> servers, 100mbit in most rooms, and 54mbit wireless. With all of the<br>> wonderful infrastructure, I still only have 4Mbit to the outside world<br>> (thanks, Timewarner for not offering FIOS). I guess that I could claim
<br>> that my COD4 server has "GIGABIT CONNECTIVITY", as it is connected to<br>> the gig-e switch.... that does not mean that traffic coming out of my<br>> server to the outside world is anywhere near gig speeds.
<br>><br>> Even if your provider has multi-gig connections to the outside world,<br>> consider how many other people they have sold "100mbit" connections to?<br>><br>> It doesn't take many people cranking full 100mbit flows to flood a gig
<br>> network... See if you can get your provider to give you their<br>> oversubscribe numbers. How many 100mbit connections are they selling on<br>> that 10gig interconnect? Does it look possible?<br>><br>> Then, you have to consider transit latency. Even if your provider has
<br>> multi-gig connections to their provider, think about where the flows<br>> pass over exchange points. When I look at the output of traceroute, I<br>> see a couple of places that it is obvious that network traffic is
<br>> hitting some sort of roadblock.<br>><br>> From a couple of traceroutes:<br>><br>> 5 <a href="http://tran-01-so-3-0-0-0.chrl.twtelecom.net" target="_blank">tran-01-so-3-0-0-0.chrl.twtelecom.net</a> (
<a href="http://66.192.242.83" target="_blank">66.192.242.83</a>) 11.216 ms<br>> 15.932 ms 12.966 ms<br>> 6 <a href="http://sl-gw25-atl-11-0.sprintlink.net" target="_blank">sl-gw25-atl-11-0.sprintlink.net</a> (<a href="http://144.223.47.109" target="_blank">
144.223.47.109</a>) 43.524 ms 78.588<br>> ms 79.817 ms<br>><br>> ----<br>><br>> 5 <a href="http://66.192.240.22" target="_blank">66.192.240.22</a> (<a href="http://66.192.240.22" target="_blank">66.192.240.22
</a>) 12.108 ms 12.603 ms 11.341 ms<br>> 6 <a href="http://equinix.ash.cw.net" target="_blank">equinix.ash.cw.net</a> (<a href="http://206.223.115.73" target="_blank">206.223.115.73</a>) 22.974 ms 22.492 ms 21.183
ms<br>> 7 <a href="http://so-7-0-0-dcr2.amd.cw.net" target="_blank">so-7-0-0-dcr2.amd.cw.net</a> (<a href="http://195.2.10.250" target="_blank">195.2.10.250</a>) 114.699 ms 112.953 ms<br>> 110.524 ms<br>> 8
<a href="http://so-4-0-0-ycr2.skt.cw.net" target="_blank">so-4-0-0-ycr2.skt.cw.net</a> (<a href="http://206.24.147.198" target="_blank">206.24.147.198</a>) 130.159 ms<br>><br>> ----<br>><br>> 4 <a href="http://66-194-17-105.static.twtelecom.net" target="_blank">
66-194-17-105.static.twtelecom.net</a> (<a href="http://66.194.17.105" target="_blank">66.194.17.105</a>) 4.379 ms 5.681<br>> ms 3.796 ms<br>> 5 <a href="http://66.192.251.27" target="_blank">66.192.251.27</a> (
<a href="http://66.192.251.27" target="_blank">66.192.251.27</a>) 65.738 ms 65.757 ms 65.204 ms<br>> 6 * * *<br>> 7 <a href="http://58.229.14.41" target="_blank">58.229.14.41</a> (<a href="http://58.229.14.41" target="_blank">
58.229.14.41</a>) 221.330 ms 220.193 ms 220.977 ms<br>> 8 <a href="http://58.229.12.30" target="_blank">58.229.12.30</a> (<a href="http://58.229.12.30" target="_blank">58.229.12.30</a>) 224.661 ms 221.868 ms 216.257
ms<br>><br>> So, from these few examples, you can see that network latency is<br>> introduced in places 2,3,5,10 hops away from you that neither you nor<br>> your provider have any control over, nor hopes of fixing.
<br>><br>> Now, what I came here to say: YOU CAN'T ASK THE QUESTION "HOW MANY<br>> PLAYERS CAN I SUPPORT" AND EXPECT A REALISTIC ANSWER, assuming that you<br>> are talking about player experience, or people playing on a LAN.
<br>><br>> BTW, I work for Internet Systems Consortium (<a href="http://www.isc.org" target="_blank">www.isc.org</a>) on the BIND<br>> and DHCP training and support team. We get questions all the time<br>> asking "how big a server do I need to serve X number of zones and to
<br>> support Y number of recursive clients... I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION<br>> EITHER, and for mostly the same reasons.<br>><br>> Thanks for your time and patience in reading this entire e-mail.<br>><br>
> {and if you've actually read this far, please quit asking about sizing<br>> servers, K? THX!}<br>><br>> AlanC<br>><br>><br><br><br><br></div></div>---<br><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
<a href="mailto:cod-unsubscribe@icculus.org">cod-unsubscribe@icculus.org</a><br>Mailing list archives: <a href="http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38" target="_blank">http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/ezmlm/ezmlm-cgi?38</a>
<br><br><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br>