Jump to content

Very high packet count for large MTA servers


Recommended Posts

Looks like a design issue with 15->20 players we are seeing 3000 packets a second from the MTA server 99% of which are 20 byte packets the rest 2 and 3 byte packets. This is causing lag and timeout of the server due to scheduling issues.

Each client is getting 160 packets a second :shock: from the server. Is there a way to limit the server "fps" to something reasonable like 20 so each client only gets 20 packets a second?

Link to comment

if u did that noone would play on ur server, bkuz dropped packets is virtural lag, text packets, animations, ect ect packets would be dropped, there is a way to limit packets, or bytes per second i forget which, look in the server's config file, but i wont be joining that server anytime soon.

Link to comment

I dont think you understand how network games work. They process information from clients at a give "fps" and send updates out at the same given fps. So its either the server is sending updates at a very high "fps" or its basicly relaying the updates from each client to each other client ( havent looked at that theory yet ). Either way the result is its sending too many packets. It either needs to combine updates in the case of relaying, or lower the "fps" so that it uses a more reasonable amount of packets.

To give you some idea a 32 player COD server process just over 600 packets per second and that is processing a lot more information.

Link to comment
No I dont its a great addition to GTA but unless these issues are raised they wont get fixed will they :P

When you're a programmer, you're always trying to optimise things for ultimate efficiency, so issues like these will improve with each core release. The team don't need to be reminded of this because they take it for granted that these issues need improvement.

Link to comment

Yes you try to make things better with each release but unless there's a major issue there's always the "I aint broke dont fix it" side especially when there are other things demanding your time.

All I'm doing its just making people aware that it is an issue, this is what the forums for, so the project can move forward and hopefully it will get fixed in the next release.

Link to comment

I think your assuming a bit to much here peps. There no place where I've seen stating that this is a know issue and its being fixed. There is not even a mention of excessive packet count on these forums, there's high bandwidth mentioned several times even in the config but to be honest the bandwith used is small and not worth even mentioning its the high packet count thats affecting performance.

If it is a know issue and its being worked on then great. As I said I'm just raising it so if it isnt know about then it is now :D

Link to comment
umm, what do you think packets are, sending packets, takes up bandwidth, take up bandwitdh = bandwidth related posts :roll:

Hehe you are really showing ur self up now but I'll explain:

packets/s per player * no. players * avg packet size = bandwidth required

Ignoring header overhead etc this gives us:

MTA:

160 * 20 * 20 = 64000 bytes / second

Bandwith: 0.5Mb/s

BF1942:

40 * 20 * 300 = 240000 bytes / second

Bandwith: 1.8Mb/s

Conclusion MTA doesnt use that much bandwith and hence is not a problem.

Link to comment

*Points to Killing's Sig* I think you will find that killing works for MultiplayUK (UK's largest ClanSever provider) so i would take his word on this, also i agree with him as he's right :P

Go Killing!

Link to comment
also i agree with him as he's right :P

And this agreement has nothing to do with the fact that you have his site in your sig? :roll:

Actually, yeah, I agree as well. It seems a little... inefficient to have all those packets, but that will be improved in subsequent core releases (btw, MTA 0.4 uses the old 0.3 core).

Link to comment

Glad to hear it's on the list to be looked at. I love the CPU load we just had to move a server to a box with a faster kernel to cope with the packet storm :)

Link to comment
also i agree with him as he's right :P

And this agreement has nothing to do with the fact that you have his site in your sig? :roll:

i have MultiplayUK in my sig as 1.i attend their LAN's as they are the best

and 2.i used to work for them 3. its good advertising :)

also its not his site :P

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...