Re: [hlds_linux] Re: srcds with multiple ip address
ospf.. or BGP with a private AS. You could even do some crazy port forwarding stuff with ipfw :) At 04:06 PM 11/9/2005, Dan Sorenson wrote: One thought on this, how will the box choose the proper route back to the client if the srcds server is bound to multiple IP's? You'd need something that forces it to answer a packet addressed to IP 1.2.3.4 from interface ip 1.2.3.4 and use the 1.2.3.1 router as the default gateway. Otherwise, what would prevent the server from receiving a packet on 1.2.3.4, sending a reply back on 5.6.7.8, and the client happily ignoring it? Or worse, sourcing a packet on 1.2.3.4, choosing 5.6.7.1 as the appropriate gateway, which isn't on the same network, and dropping the packet as undeliverable? There may be a way to do it, but I'm thinking a router running OSPF or BGP if you can is the way to go. - Dan * Dan Sorenson DoD #1066 A.H.M.C. #35 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Vikings? There ain't no vikings here. Just us honest farmers. * * The town was burning, the villagers were dead. They didn't need * * those sheep anyway. That's our story and we're sticking to it. * ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
[hlds_linux] Re: Specifying Log file size in 1.6
>3. Re: Specifying Log file size in 1.6 (m0gely)
>4. Re: Specifying Log file size in 1.6 (kama)
> Send the server a 'log off' then tar.gz the log file, then send 'log on'
> again. You could do that on a monthly basis and make a script easily
> enough to automate it.
>
> Actually he just need todo a 'log on' and it will rotate the file.
>
> I have written a script that gzip all the files each month and then save
> last month in its own directory to keep the file list short. And there is
> no need to use tar if its only one file. 'gzip ' will pack the
> file and delete the unpacked file.
>
> basically the script for packing files is:
>
> --
> cd /where/you/have/your/logfiledir/
>
> files=`ls *.log | sort`
> count=`echo $files | awk '{ print NF }'`
> # save 2 files
> no=2
>
> for i in $files
> do
> if [ -f $i -a $no -lt $count ]
> then
> gzip $i
> fi
> no=`echo $no | awk '{ a=$1; a++; print a }'`
> done
> --
Thanks for the code and how to archive my logs, but the problem is that with
a one map server the log file grows to 4-5MB per day, and over the course of
a few days the server starts to lag, all I want it to to is create a new log
file every 1-2 MB, is there a setting to do this?
I appreciate the log script tho, I archive my logs every 3 months (to help
with the stats record keeping) so this WILL come in handy ;)
-Llama
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS
I had someone run over my servers a tweak some stuff in the config before and it was running better, but due to a critical failure we lost all the config changes, and now the servers are noticeably slower. I remember them talking about rates or something. Mean anything to anyone? Thanks, Joel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Warren Sent: Thursday, 10 November 2005 12:02 PM To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS that's a very low load. Yes your bots are probably causing that but that loading is nothing to be concerned about. Joel Dickson wrote: > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > -- > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] > Hi, > > > > Just wondering if anyone can refer me to any sources or give advice on > getting the best performance out of HLDS Linux. > > > > I've had a 48 player server chewing 25% CPU load on a dual 2.8GHz Xeon > lately, which just doesn't seem right to me :-) though I am running some > bots in it so im not sure if that effect CPU load > > > > Thanks, > > > > Joel > > -- > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > -- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/ ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
[hlds_linux] Re: srcds with multiple ip address
One thought on this, how will the box choose the proper route back to the client if the srcds server is bound to multiple IP's? You'd need something that forces it to answer a packet addressed to IP 1.2.3.4 from interface ip 1.2.3.4 and use the 1.2.3.1 router as the default gateway. Otherwise, what would prevent the server from receiving a packet on 1.2.3.4, sending a reply back on 5.6.7.8, and the client happily ignoring it? Or worse, sourcing a packet on 1.2.3.4, choosing 5.6.7.1 as the appropriate gateway, which isn't on the same network, and dropping the packet as undeliverable? There may be a way to do it, but I'm thinking a router running OSPF or BGP if you can is the way to go. - Dan * Dan Sorenson DoD #1066 A.H.M.C. #35 [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Vikings? There ain't no vikings here. Just us honest farmers. * * The town was burning, the villagers were dead. They didn't need * * those sheep anyway. That's our story and we're sticking to it. * ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
RE: [hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS
You're completely consuming one of the virtual cpus and with bots just makes matters worse. I'd like to help but you're pushing the envelope on this one bro. Rayne -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joel Dickson Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:36 PM To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Hi, Just wondering if anyone can refer me to any sources or give advice on getting the best performance out of HLDS Linux. I've had a 48 player server chewing 25% CPU load on a dual 2.8GHz Xeon lately, which just doesn't seem right to me :-) though I am running some bots in it so im not sure if that effect CPU load Thanks, Joel -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS
that's a very low load. Yes your bots are probably causing that but that loading is nothing to be concerned about. Joel Dickson wrote: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Hi, Just wondering if anyone can refer me to any sources or give advice on getting the best performance out of HLDS Linux. I've had a 48 player server chewing 25% CPU load on a dual 2.8GHz Xeon lately, which just doesn't seem right to me :-) though I am running some bots in it so im not sure if that effect CPU load Thanks, Joel -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux -- My "Foundation" verse: Isa 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith the LORD. -- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" CDTT (Certified Duct Tape Technician) Linux user #322099 Machines: 206822 256638 276825 http://counter.li.org/ ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
[hlds_linux] Tweaking performance of HLDS
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ] Hi, Just wondering if anyone can refer me to any sources or give advice on getting the best performance out of HLDS Linux. I've had a 48 player server chewing 25% CPU load on a dual 2.8GHz Xeon lately, which just doesn't seem right to me :-) though I am running some bots in it so im not sure if that effect CPU load Thanks, Joel -- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
On Nov 9, 2005, at 2:03 PM, kama wrote: I am aware of the whole FreeBSD Release cycle. Been using FreeBSD since early 2.x. That was directed at the "wait for -STABLE" comment earlier. I merely tried to ask, if someone have upgraded and if they found any problems, to save me the trouble if I where to make the same mistake as them. I haven't upgraded my (non-HLDS) servers yet. I've heard good things about both the upgrades and the stability of the platform, although I doubt my second-hand opinion matters much. Off the record, I believe 6.0 is mature enough to be installed since its 5.x + a lot of bugfixes. Its not the same big change as from 4.x to 5.x. I will be upgrading all my freebsd servers at work from 5.x to 6.0 next week, since there are a lot of performance tweaks within areas that are used by the application. This is about my view as well. I've been hearing things that overall performance and stability is much better in the 6.x line. -- Erik Hollensbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
I would subscribe to current@ before you decide to upgrade anything, plus I would wait till the next release cycle to get tagged before you start upgrading anything. At 05:03 PM 11/9/2005, kama wrote: I am aware of the whole FreeBSD Release cycle. Been using FreeBSD since early 2.x. I merely tried to ask, if someone have upgraded and if they found any problems, to save me the trouble if I where to make the same mistake as them. Off the record, I believe 6.0 is mature enough to be installed since its 5.x + a lot of bugfixes. Its not the same big change as from 4.x to 5.x. I will be upgrading all my freebsd servers at work from 5.x to 6.0 next week, since there are a lot of performance tweaks within areas that are used by the application. /Bjorn On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Erik Hollensbe wrote: > RELEASE is pulled from the STABLE tree. It's generally regarded to be > more stable than the STABLE tree, only receiving bugfixes and no new > development. > > STABLE is actually the development branch of the stable version, > while CURRENT is the development branch of the development tree > (currently 7). > > More information here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/ > books/handbook/current-stable.html > On Nov 9, 2005, at 7:22 AM, Gary wrote: > > > Wait till -STABLE (which is when 6.1 lifecycle starts) > > > > At 07:19 AM 11/9/2005, kama wrote: > > > >> Is there anyone that have upgraded to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on their > >> game > >> server? > >> > >> Are there any performance changes? > >> Does ULE help? > >> Have you found any problem with 6.0? > >> > >> I have not found any info about problems with 6.0 since release. > >> At least > >> nothing that would conflict on a game server. > >> > >> I am asking this before I start upgrade, so I don't get standing with > >> servers that are unusable. > >> > >> /Bjorn > >> > >> ___ > >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > >> archives, please visit: > >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > > archives, please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > -- > Erik Hollensbe > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
I am aware of the whole FreeBSD Release cycle. Been using FreeBSD since early 2.x. I merely tried to ask, if someone have upgraded and if they found any problems, to save me the trouble if I where to make the same mistake as them. Off the record, I believe 6.0 is mature enough to be installed since its 5.x + a lot of bugfixes. Its not the same big change as from 4.x to 5.x. I will be upgrading all my freebsd servers at work from 5.x to 6.0 next week, since there are a lot of performance tweaks within areas that are used by the application. /Bjorn On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Erik Hollensbe wrote: > RELEASE is pulled from the STABLE tree. It's generally regarded to be > more stable than the STABLE tree, only receiving bugfixes and no new > development. > > STABLE is actually the development branch of the stable version, > while CURRENT is the development branch of the development tree > (currently 7). > > More information here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/ > books/handbook/current-stable.html > On Nov 9, 2005, at 7:22 AM, Gary wrote: > > > Wait till -STABLE (which is when 6.1 lifecycle starts) > > > > At 07:19 AM 11/9/2005, kama wrote: > > > >> Is there anyone that have upgraded to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on their > >> game > >> server? > >> > >> Are there any performance changes? > >> Does ULE help? > >> Have you found any problem with 6.0? > >> > >> I have not found any info about problems with 6.0 since release. > >> At least > >> nothing that would conflict on a game server. > >> > >> I am asking this before I start upgrade, so I don't get standing with > >> servers that are unusable. > >> > >> /Bjorn > >> > >> ___ > >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > >> archives, please visit: > >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > > > ___ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > > archives, please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > -- > Erik Hollensbe > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ___ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Specifying Log file size in 1.6
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, m0gely wrote:
> devin812 wrote:
>
> > Hey Guys,
> >
> > I've looked around for this and i'm sure one of you know the answer, how do
> > I limit the log file size that the server creates, so when it gets to a
> > certain size it will start a new file?
> >
> > I currently have the server on one map only, the log file will normally
> > start over on map change, but with one map only servers the logfile can get
> > huge...
> >
> > Help! and thanks
> > -Some llama
>
> Send the server a 'log off' then tar.gz the log file, then send 'log on'
> again. You could do that on a monthly basis and make a script easily
> enough to automate it.
Actually he just need todo a 'log on' and it will rotate the file.
I have written a script that gzip all the files each month and then save
last month in its own directory to keep the file list short. And there is
no need to use tar if its only one file. 'gzip ' will pack the
file and delete the unpacked file.
basically the script for packing files is:
--
cd /where/you/have/your/logfiledir/
files=`ls *.log | sort`
count=`echo $files | awk '{ print NF }'`
# save 2 files
no=2
for i in $files
do
if [ -f $i -a $no -lt $count ]
then
gzip $i
fi
no=`echo $no | awk '{ a=$1; a++; print a }'`
done
--
Then I have a lot of other stuff to move them to different direcories,
clean up and such.
/Bjorn
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please
visit:
http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] Specifying Log file size in 1.6
devin812 wrote: Hey Guys, I've looked around for this and i'm sure one of you know the answer, how do I limit the log file size that the server creates, so when it gets to a certain size it will start a new file? I currently have the server on one map only, the log file will normally start over on map change, but with one map only servers the logfile can get huge... Help! and thanks -Some llama Send the server a 'log off' then tar.gz the log file, then send 'log on' again. You could do that on a monthly basis and make a script easily enough to automate it. -- - m0gely http://quake2.telestream.com/ Q2 | Q3A | Counter-strike ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
RELEASE is pulled from the STABLE tree. It's generally regarded to be more stable than the STABLE tree, only receiving bugfixes and no new development. STABLE is actually the development branch of the stable version, while CURRENT is the development branch of the development tree (currently 7). More information here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/ books/handbook/current-stable.html On Nov 9, 2005, at 7:22 AM, Gary wrote: Wait till -STABLE (which is when 6.1 lifecycle starts) At 07:19 AM 11/9/2005, kama wrote: Is there anyone that have upgraded to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on their game server? Are there any performance changes? Does ULE help? Have you found any problem with 6.0? I have not found any info about problems with 6.0 since release. At least nothing that would conflict on a game server. I am asking this before I start upgrade, so I don't get standing with servers that are unusable. /Bjorn ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux -- Erik Hollensbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: [hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
Wait till -STABLE (which is when 6.1 lifecycle starts) At 07:19 AM 11/9/2005, kama wrote: Is there anyone that have upgraded to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on their game server? Are there any performance changes? Does ULE help? Have you found any problem with 6.0? I have not found any info about problems with 6.0 since release. At least nothing that would conflict on a game server. I am asking this before I start upgrade, so I don't get standing with servers that are unusable. /Bjorn ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
[hlds_linux] FreeBSD 6.0
Is there anyone that have upgraded to FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on their game server? Are there any performance changes? Does ULE help? Have you found any problem with 6.0? I have not found any info about problems with 6.0 since release. At least nothing that would conflict on a game server. I am asking this before I start upgrade, so I don't get standing with servers that are unusable. /Bjorn ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
