This report relates to a message you sent with the following header fields:
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ims-ms-daemon.pop2.starhub.net.sg by pop2.starhub.net.sg
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001))
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(original mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Wed,
10 Oct 2001 15:33:41 +0800 (SGT)
Received: from list.valvesoftware.com ([205.158.143.9])
by pop2.starhub.net.sg (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001))
with ESMTP id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for
trash-trash@ims-ms-daemon (ORCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Wed,
10 Oct 2001 15:33:41 +0800 (SGT)
Received: from list.valvesoftware.com
(listcaster.valvesoftware.com [205.158.143.102]) by list.valvesoftware.com
with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21)
id 4QGS46J2; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:34:01 +0100
Received: from ramius.hardwarefreak.devastation.cc
(adsl-65-68-135-105.dsl.stlsmo.swbell.net [65.68.135.105])
by list.valvesoftware.com with SMTP
(Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21)
id 4QGS4517; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:30:11 +0100
Received: by RAMIUS with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
id <4PD2PD91>; Wed, 10 Oct 2001 02:27:11 -0500
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 02:27:09 -0500
From: Stan Hoeppner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [OT] RE: RAMdisk to improve map change performance?? Ithink n ot
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Errors-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-id: <65717CC11CAED4118C1100A02401ECAA02A3AD@RAMIUS>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your message cannot be delivered to the following recipients:
Recipient address: trash-trash@ims-ms-daemon
Original address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reason: Over quota
Reporting-MTA: dns;pop2.starhub.net.sg (ims-ms-daemon)
Original-recipient: rfc822;[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Final-recipient: rfc822;trash-trash@ims-ms-daemon
Action: failed
Status: 5.2.2 (Over quota)
--- Begin Message ---
My overall point is that a RAMdisk is not necessary to fix his slow map load
problem, and will require a phenominal amount of work and tweaking just to
get it right. Very low ROI.
StanTheMan
TheHardwareFreak
www.hardwarefreak.devastation.cc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin J. Anderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 9:10 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [OT] RE: RAMdisk to improve map change
> performance?? Ithink
> not
>
>
>
> well, you dont need to put the WHOLE thing on a ram disk you
> know. I'm not
> sure how/if its possible in windowsX, but in linux you can
> use symbolic
> links to to put only certain speed dependant stuff on a
> ramdisk to speed up
> your server.
>
> dont ask me how though, I havent ever tried that in linux,
> just know people
> do it.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ken Kirchner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 9:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [OT] RE: RAMdisk to improve map change
> performance?? Ithink not
>
>
> |
> | On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> |
> | > This might be worth the money for a niche small dedicated app that
> doesn't
> | > generate much data, but for HLDS files? My CS dir is
> 384MB alone! Any
> idea
> | > what size RAMdisk you'd need to put all the HLDS files in
> it? Would you
> | > store your log files there as well? If not, you've got
> some surgery to
> | > perform on your HLDS config, in order to write out to
> your physical disk
> ban
> | > file and logs in REALTIME. If your server goes down (the
> machine, not
> | > HLDS), bye bye ban file, logs, etc.
> | >
> | > Suffice it to say, trying to use a RAMdisk to host the
> files for an HLDS
> | > server is a crappy idea.
> |
> | Well.. trying to use THAT ramdisk might not fly, but I
> think Quantum makes
> | something called an SSD (Solid State Drives or such) which
> is exactly as
> | it sounds. A hardrive made up of memory chips. Ungodly performance
> | compared to your normal spinning disk type media. Of
> course, they are
> | expensive as hell! :) Oh and they werent very big. I
> think last I saw
> | they were around 1GB max, but it's been awhile. Cant
> imagine what a RAID
> | set-up with these puppies would be like. I think the limitations of
> | current drive controllers would be the bottleneck.
> |
> | What you need for the PC is something like the Amiga's RAD
> device. It was
> | a RAM drive that was recoverable after a reboot (usually).
> One of the
> | many neat tricks the Amiga was able to pull of back in the 80's.
> |
> | But other than the intial map loading, there isnt a whole
> lot of disk I/O
> | on an hlds server is there (assuming your arent swapping)?
> |
> |
> | --
> | Ken Kirchner : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | Assistant System Administrator : Tel (318)222-2638
> | ShreveNet, Inc. : Fax (318)213-2650
> |
> | ShreveNet - Your Premium Internet Service Provider!
> |
> |
>
>
--- End Message ---
