Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
Using these settings, I almost never get choke on any server. rate 25000 cl_cmdrate set to the same as your FPS cl_updaterate 20-101 depending on server...if you see choke drop to default and work up till choke starts to show up again - Original Message - From: "[Mage]-BadPing-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 8:45 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > /quote Britt Priddy (PZGN)/end quote > > When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see > > alot of choke - > > For me choke was almost all client-side. If you make changes on the fly > in game you can really see dramatic changes in connection quality by > messing with the various settings, especially with net_graph 2 enabled. > I'm on cable and these setting result in the minumum choke for me: > > fps_max "90" > cl_updaterate "180" > cl_cmdrate "90" > rate 1 > > Those settings give me 0 choke when nothing is going on and maybe as much > as 5 or 10 in a really bad firefight. > > For me the easiest to read netgraph settings are: > > net_graphpos "2" > net_graph "2" > > > YMMV. This is defintely not to say that server settings don't affect > choke, but it does help in diagnosing where the choke is coming from. > > -BP > > ___ > 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
It has always provided the best fps than any of command line parameters. On a full server, HLSW shows it to be 200fps. And the players have always complemented its low ping. Britt Priddy (PZGN) wrote: ok cool - how would you compare this plugin vs. -pingboost 1 or 3 ? Please dont beat me up if this has already been answered :P Pro's / Con's ? Reason I ask - I am forced to use -pingboost 1 on CPU's with 128k Cache and 256k Cache- the 512k cache CPU's scream and dont require any pingboosting. Britt - Original Message - From: "Matt Judge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 10:09 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd Yes, It works with Cheating Death and in VAC secure mode. Britt Priddy (PZGN) wrote: Does it work with the server being secure? ___ 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
ok cool - how would you compare this plugin vs. -pingboost 1 or 3 ? Please dont beat me up if this has already been answered :P Pro's / Con's ? Reason I ask - I am forced to use -pingboost 1 on CPU's with 128k Cache and 256k Cache- the 512k cache CPU's scream and dont require any pingboosting. Britt - Original Message - From: "Matt Judge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 10:09 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > Yes, > > It works with Cheating Death and in VAC secure mode. > > > Britt Priddy (PZGN) wrote: > > >Does it work with the server being secure? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
Yes, It works with Cheating Death and in VAC secure mode. Britt Priddy (PZGN) wrote: Does it work with the server being secure? ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
Does it work with the server being secure? - Original Message - From: "Matt Judge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 9:09 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > I am still using HLDSPingBooster, and it seems to be working fine under > both 1.5 and 1.6 (I forgot to remove it from my startup script). > > The link is http://www.udpsoft.com/booster/ > > Your mileage may vary. > > My stats are at: http://www.axia.org.uk/cstats/ > > > ___ > 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
I am still using HLDSPingBooster, and it seems to be working fine under both 1.5 and 1.6 (I forgot to remove it from my startup script). The link is http://www.udpsoft.com/booster/ Your mileage may vary. My stats are at: http://www.axia.org.uk/cstats/ ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
/quote Britt Priddy (PZGN)/end quote > When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see > alot of choke - For me choke was almost all client-side. If you make changes on the fly in game you can really see dramatic changes in connection quality by messing with the various settings, especially with net_graph 2 enabled. I'm on cable and these setting result in the minumum choke for me: fps_max "90" cl_updaterate "180" cl_cmdrate "90" rate 1 Those settings give me 0 choke when nothing is going on and maybe as much as 5 or 10 in a really bad firefight. For me the easiest to read netgraph settings are: net_graphpos "2" net_graph "2" YMMV. This is defintely not to say that server settings don't affect choke, but it does help in diagnosing where the choke is coming from. -BP ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
/quote Daniel Stroven/end quote > BP > > What did you change on your servers? No flames, I'm always ready to be reasonable when a serious discussion is at hand :) The difference is all in -pingboost 3. It's been on and off semi-randomly in an attempt to see if anybody actually noticed. I see some have :) I tried playing with sys_ticrate, and it definitely had a dramatic effect on FPS, at the cost of much CPU for little observed benefit. Changing it from 100 to 200 to 500 to 1000 didn't help ping, it only ate CPU. I was seeing 900 FPS at times wirh ticrate 1000, but is that really a relevant number? It's running an average of 150 FPS with reasonable CPU. Give me a map and a player load and I can tell you exactly how much. Kernel is untouched. HZ is not a default option AFAIK on the 2.4.18 kernel and I don't relaly feel like mucking around with kernel patches ATM. Call it a dirty hack or workaround, but pingboost, and level 3 in particular has been the magic bullet. Levels 1 and 2 use less CPU but also don't have the same dramatic effect on ping. -BP ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
Here is what found... "cl_updaterate 20 Ranged 10-101 Number of updates client will request from the server each second. In general, the more players in the game, the lower this should be. If you are getting choke, lower this value until you have none. cl_cmdrate 30 Ranged 10-101 Number of times per second that the client will update the server. This command affects ping and recoil. Trial and error is usually best for this." Tom - Original Message - From: "Britt Priddy (PZGN)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 2:42 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > Do you have any 'base line' suggestions for adjusting the rate / > cl_updaterate / cl_cmdrate ? next to the defaults? > > Thanks J! > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:33 PM > Subject: RE: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best > OS for the server debian/freebsd > > > > You see choke because your server is outperforming your client. Choke IS > NOT > > a bad thing. Just adjust your rates to your client only recieves the > number > > of updates it can handle. > > > > Jeremy > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Britt > > Priddy (PZGN) > > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:26 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The > > best OS for the server debian/freebsd > > > > > > When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see > > alot of choke - with one 20 player server running - CPU has 256k cache - I > > do not see this or need pingboost on CPU's using 512k cache nor on Intel > > Celerons 1.7ghz having 128k cache (using Pingboost 1) - no choke occurs... > > Using Redhat 8 - with all up2date crap install - minimal install - no GUI > / > > XWin, etc... I use the P4 1.7ghz - Gen. Intel 256k CPU cache and if no > > pingboost specified the FPS is around 49-50 - with pingboost 1 - it jumps > up > > to 97-99FPS - but see extreme choke - only 1 hlds process running on this > > box I'm one confused mofo now. > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
Do you have any 'base line' suggestions for adjusting the rate / cl_updaterate / cl_cmdrate ? next to the defaults? Thanks J! - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:33 PM Subject: RE: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > You see choke because your server is outperforming your client. Choke IS NOT > a bad thing. Just adjust your rates to your client only recieves the number > of updates it can handle. > > Jeremy > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Britt > Priddy (PZGN) > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:26 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The > best OS for the server debian/freebsd > > > When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see > alot of choke - with one 20 player server running - CPU has 256k cache - I > do not see this or need pingboost on CPU's using 512k cache nor on Intel > Celerons 1.7ghz having 128k cache (using Pingboost 1) - no choke occurs... > Using Redhat 8 - with all up2date crap install - minimal install - no GUI / > XWin, etc... I use the P4 1.7ghz - Gen. Intel 256k CPU cache and if no > pingboost specified the FPS is around 49-50 - with pingboost 1 - it jumps up > to 97-99FPS - but see extreme choke - only 1 hlds process running on this > box I'm one confused mofo now. > > > > > ___ > 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: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
You see choke because your server is outperforming your client. Choke IS NOT a bad thing. Just adjust your rates to your client only recieves the number of updates it can handle. Jeremy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Britt Priddy (PZGN) Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see alot of choke - with one 20 player server running - CPU has 256k cache - I do not see this or need pingboost on CPU's using 512k cache nor on Intel Celerons 1.7ghz having 128k cache (using Pingboost 1) - no choke occurs... Using Redhat 8 - with all up2date crap install - minimal install - no GUI / XWin, etc... I use the P4 1.7ghz - Gen. Intel 256k CPU cache and if no pingboost specified the FPS is around 49-50 - with pingboost 1 - it jumps up to 97-99FPS - but see extreme choke - only 1 hlds process running on this box I'm one confused mofo now. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
When I use pingboost 1 or pingboost 3 on a P4 1.7ghz - 1gig ddram - I see alot of choke - with one 20 player server running - CPU has 256k cache - I do not see this or need pingboost on CPU's using 512k cache nor on Intel Celerons 1.7ghz having 128k cache (using Pingboost 1) - no choke occurs... Using Redhat 8 - with all up2date crap install - minimal install - no GUI / XWin, etc... I use the P4 1.7ghz - Gen. Intel 256k CPU cache and if no pingboost specified the FPS is around 49-50 - with pingboost 1 - it jumps up to 97-99FPS - but see extreme choke - only 1 hlds process running on this box I'm one confused mofo now. - Original Message - From: "Daniel Stroven" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 2:44 PM Subject: Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > 500hz/700hz/1000hz > with sys_ticrate at default 100 > pingboost 1 > > Should be reasonable cpu (except 1120 hlds) with much lower pings, 100+fps > on server side and smoother play. > > > - Original Message - > From: "Sindre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "hlds_linux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 9:22 AM > Subject: RE: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best > OS for the server debian/freebsd > > > > First, you have to look at valves official response to what pingboost > does: > > > > -snip- > > > > All the pingboot modes attempt to reduce the latency caused by the server. > > The default implementation adds around 20msec to each players ping (under > > linux). > > > > Mode "1" reduces this by using a different wait method (a select() call). > > This method reduces the latency to 10msec. > > > > Mode "2" uses a similar but slightly different method (and alarm() type > > call). Again, the result it 10msec worth of latency being added. NOTE that > > this method has the potential to hang a server in certain (terminal) > > situations. If anyone has used this mode recently (not the first test we > > did!) and it hangs please speak up > > > > Mode "3" minimises the latency to the minimum possible level by processing > > a frame EVERY time a packet arrives. This causes the lowest possible > > latency, but can also cause extreme CPU usages (it does a complete frame > > for every packet, with each player sending lots of packets per second and > > 30 players this adds up to insane amounts of frames). Use this mode at > > your own risk, it will consume all available CPU, don't complain that > > cstrike uses too much CPU if you use this mode :-) In a future release > > this mode will be tweaked to let the admin balance latencies agains CPU > > usage (by processing a frame every N packets). > > > > There is also an external modules called "pingbooster" by UDPSoft (or is > > it UDPSoftware?). They implement something like mode "3". As this is an > > external module, and was built for an older version of HL (1108) it may > > not work properly any longer, and future releases may (accidently) break > > it. > > > > -snip- > > > > Then you realise that this is just a "quick'n'dirty" fix, instead of > letting > > the kernel handle the scheduling, which it's supposed to. > > > > Changing the kernel also works a lot better in all practical situations, > as > > long as you are able to compile a new kernel, that is. > > > > For example, cranking up pingboost and sys_ticrate gives high fps, but not > > really steady, they flux like mad, even dropping below 100, unlike 700hz > > kernel and sys_ticrate, which is at a steady 350 fps as long you got > enough > > cpu to spare. > > > > This might of course not be an issue for everyone, since I see people that > are > > happy with sub-50 fps, if you want top-notch performance though, you > should > > use higher hz. > > > > - Sindre > > > > >= Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] = > > >> pingboost is just a dirty work-around > > >> > > >> - Sindre > > > > > >Well that certainly explains it all! Care to enlighten us as to why? > > > > > >Thanks! > > > > > >___ > > >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 > ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
Re: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd
BP What did you change on your servers? Looks to me like you started testing higher hz kernels. In game pings on your servers have been drastically reduced...like you would see going from 100hz to higher hz kernel. Previous pings in game on your servers were 80-100 with spikes above that. In the last week or two, ingame pings are now lower. 65-75 ping now for me, and I see sub 30ms players in game now. Megabite and other higher pinging clan members (100-130ms) are now actually getting under 100ms. Will you come clean and admit the change, or just try to say you changed nothing, and the servers just miraculously started playing better? Your servers are seeing more traffic during daytime now too...due to the improvements. Its not just mostly full at night anymore is it :) Dispite the flames you posted in earlier threads, I am sure you see the difference now between play at 100hz vs play at higher hz levels. Do feel to unsatisfied with the answer you have gotten on this list. The few you did get and tried, worked well for you. /waiting for flame - Original Message - From: "[Mage]-BadPing-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 11:22 AM Subject: RE: -pingboost 3 and low sys_ticrate RE: [hlds_linux] Re: The best OS for the server debian/freebsd > That's exactly the same info posted earlier in this thread (by me, among > others). > > While it does shed some light on pingboost, it far from explains all the > variables involved and the potential effects on CPU use and game > experience. > > /feeling unsatisfied > > -BP > > /quote Sindre/end quote > > First, you have to look at valves official response to what pingboost > > does: > > > > -snip- > > > > All the pingboot modes attempt to reduce the latency caused by the server. > > The default implementation adds around 20msec to each players ping (under > > linux). > > > > Mode "1" reduces this by using a different wait method (a select() call). > > This method reduces the latency to 10msec. > > > > Mode "2" uses a similar but slightly different method (and alarm() type > > call). Again, the result it 10msec worth of latency being added. NOTE that > > this method has the potential to hang a server in certain (terminal) > > situations. If anyone has used this mode recently (not the first test we > > did!) and it hangs please speak up > > > > Mode "3" minimises the latency to the minimum possible level by processing > > a frame EVERY time a packet arrives. This causes the lowest possible > > latency, but can also cause extreme CPU usages (it does a complete frame > > for every packet, with each player sending lots of packets per second and > > 30 players this adds up to insane amounts of frames). Use this mode at > > your own risk, it will consume all available CPU, don't complain that > > cstrike uses too much CPU if you use this mode :-) In a future release > > this mode will be tweaked to let the admin balance latencies agains CPU > > usage (by processing a frame every N packets). > > > > There is also an external modules called "pingbooster" by UDPSoft (or is > > it UDPSoftware?). They implement something like mode "3". As this is an > > external module, and was built for an older version of HL (1108) it may > > not work properly any longer, and future releases may (accidently) break > > it. > > > > -snip- > > > > Then you realise that this is just a "quick'n'dirty" fix, instead of > > letting > > the kernel handle the scheduling, which it's supposed to. > > > > Changing the kernel also works a lot better in all practical situations, > > as > > long as you are able to compile a new kernel, that is. > > > > For example, cranking up pingboost and sys_ticrate gives high fps, but not > > really steady, they flux like mad, even dropping below 100, unlike 700hz > > kernel and sys_ticrate, which is at a steady 350 fps as long you got > > enough > > cpu to spare. > > > > This might of course not be an issue for everyone, since I see people that > > are > > happy with sub-50 fps, if you want top-notch performance though, you > > should > > use higher hz. > > > > - Sindre > > > >>= Original Message From [EMAIL PROTECTED] = > >>> pingboost is just a dirty work-around > >>> > >>> - Sindre > >> > >>Well that certainly explains it all! Care to enlighten us as to why? > >> > >>Thanks! > >> > >>
