Fish Wolf Dimension Congrats!
 

(BEFORE HAND, IF THIS IS IN WRONG SECTION MOVE IT SUPPORT HELPERS)

CONGRATS to Fish-Wolf Dimension, I have witnessed the 70 person break, wow, congratulations. Not quite as good as 100 but pretty damn close if you ask me! You guys are amazing, you set up a server that is popular, cunning, and stable. List of acalades:

Set up a kickass server
Found out what da people want
Got what da people want
Being Tenacious!

Everyone Congratulate Fishwolf Dismension, For their hard working and ambitious crew! I know their might be more people coming but this is a break through, and slap me if this has already been discussed, if that is the case, I think I it still had reason to celebrate!!

:D :D


WELL CRAP I forgot to put picture and I lost it before i could Paste, damn. oh well, its at like 50 now BUT I SWEAR IT WAS 70!

Re: Fish Wolf Dimension Congrats!
 

Does anyone actually pronounce this as "da?" Can't we just use "the?" If that's not good enough, there's always "tha," but really, that's just horrid.

That aside, yes, congratulations FishWolf Dimension! You have left my still-in-testing server as a distant second (about a dozen people) for population maximums!

What are you runnin da server on?

Mine?

Athlon XP 1800+
1gb PC2100 DDR
Incredible amounts of bandwidth courtesy of Colorado State University

Soon there will be another machine:
Athlon XP 2000+
768mb PC2100 DDR
Incredible amounts of bandwidth courtesy of Colorado State University

I get all kinds of lag when I'm logged on from my home computer (crappy ADSL) but everyone else reports pings of 50. Server's going to be private soon anyway though.

I've had about 15 people max with no lag. The machine runs 8 zone servers.

no. Whoever Runs Fishwolf Dismension.

As for wrong forum, its fine here np

That would be me. I run the server on two machines, niether
of which are great. One is an athlon 850, 1.5gb ram. Other is a
pIII 933 with 512m ram.

Wish I had more machines, and stronger ones :P

-bobzub

What kind of connection?

I have 100mb to the switch, then multihomed GB
to the net.

-bobzub

Yes, I've noticed that the general consensus from these forums is that hardware matters more than it really does. Bandwidth is actually probably more important; I've read someone having 3 dual P4 2.8ghz machines with a gig of ram each for zone servers alone (with other dual CPU machines for world and db) only supporting 40 - 60 people. Fishwolf's CPUs are slower than mine and he only has 256mb more total ram than I do, and I was led to believe I could only support about 20 people; this is obviously hogwash as Fishwolf apparently broke 70 (I assume there was probably a bit of lag by then).

This gives me a bit of confidence.

yes he can do 70...but im willing to bet that with that setup it wasnt to pretty on the server.

Hahahaha, very true. I was losing zone servers. I ran more by hand when I saw how low it was. Some zones are definately
more laggy than others. I wasnt experiencing lag myself, but
some others complained of lag. I was surprized it was running at all really. It wasnt as bad as I would have thought, but yes problems did arise.

One other thing worth mentioning. I dont think it stayed
at that player level for too long. It dropped back to the 50's
pretty quick.

-bobzub

question... at the 70 people mark, was that more of a hardware issue or was that a connection issue?

~Dan

Multiple issues happened. People could at least connect
to the world server (surprized it was still up). But there
were a lot of zone not availables, due to the loss of zone
servers. The avg load on my machines is rediculously
high at times. The later releases have helped on load
a lot, but I know the marginal machines I use get
taxed heavily.

So I suppose I would say the bottleneck is system oriented.

btw I use linux :P

-bobzub

They Should make a board for Hardware tips and software(i.e shareware freeware not warez) for server ops only. Would downcrease newbies.

Yep your problems werent bandwith related but hardware.

When guildwars did 110 users it was on several different boxes (4-5? i can never remember the exact #) and that wasnt pretty.

lol i could only imagine what 70 would do to those 2 pc's. yer poor CPU/RAM...

Big tip to everyone out there Keep your MYSQL server on a 100% seperate box that does nothing but run mysql.

I dont know that I agree with that, mysql is pretty liteweight, and after the initial load into sharemem, access to the database *should* be relatively infrequent.. In dev's defense though, I've never really let alot of people onto my development server though so I might be talking outta my butt.. In development I tend to not run more than 5 zones or so for testing.

The 0.5.2 release has several very significant changes from an architectural perspective, and bugfixes, that once again, *should* significantly reduce CPU usage and memory usage, and improve on connectivity. Hopefully this means you'll be able to run alot more zones per machine.
Once we release, I'll be very eager to hear the communities results.

Ya know... i never thought of this before. =) Thanks for the tip. lol.

While mysql might be lite...the servers themselves arent...so under GREAT load it will cause more lag as the pc has to fight mysql and eqemu zones/world for cpu time.

Even with most loaded to sharemem, not all is. Logs goto the DB every time somone logs in ect.

Less is more on zone/world servers.

For info : I make mysql 4 run on a pentium 200, with 48 Mo Ram, under linux, connected via a 100mbits switch. It sources tmcs's DB in less time than on my P3 600 under win2k and easyphp and I use it for some other intensive DB softwares. This is working pretty good and unload the cpu servers of the Db task. That kind of pc costs... lets say the price of the hard disk. I don't know if it would be powerfull enough to handle an eqemu server with lots of players tho, anyway, unless during dumps/restore, i never overload it because it's able to deliver query results more fastly than the network can accept them (unless of very tormented queries, which is not the case in eqemu).

Why is EQemu so resource hungry? Is the traffic that much greater than UO? There's a RunUO server out there that quite consistantly breaks 1000 players on weekends and some 700 normally. I would have thought that EQ emulators would be similar.

AI, primarily. UO AI is absolute junk.

couldent agree more
 

couldent agree more Wiz

:)

btw

sorry not off topic but i just wanted to show off my Sig with some ppl, I made it myself :)

Your sig doesn't work unless we have manually typed in the geocities page and have it in our cache.

Host it at a real host if you want us to see it. Geocities doesn't allow remote links to their images.

What Real Host? Like Strike9? ok...

wtf is anthlon or wat ever ur saying anthlon 1800

sorry i am not to bright when it comes to that stuff :oops:

does anyone know if fish-wolf changed to 5.2? please say NO :(

Yes they switch'd to 5.2 and all your old char stuff is still there...

problems
 

Wrong place, sorry. check in General support under fish wolf.

Connection
 

I myself run on a Business Class Cable Internet Connection, dont know any specific's on it but it is pretty damn fast. I have a Athalon 1200, 512 MB Ram, so if it helps i could host some zoneservers for GW if you want. If ya want you can email me at Widdower@hotmail.com if ya need anything

Sorry but no one runs servers for guildwars but myself, image, and MAYBE LethalEncounter. For one simple reason, to host you need access to the DB. and NO ONE but the formentioned people get access to my db.

Thank you for the offer tho