Fellow UT Admins - Best Server OS for Low Pings??
17 January 2002, 12:29 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey chaps,
I have a question for you.......
I have been running a dedicated UT server for about 6 months now and want to find out what you reckon is the best server OS to get the lowest pings possible for clients.
Server Setup:
Tyan Tiger MP Motherboard
Dual AMD Athlon 1.4 CPU
512Meg DDR
SCSI160 Hot Swap
D-Link DFE550TX Lan side
D-Link DFE530TX Web side
Efficient Networks EN5861 ADSL Router/Firewall (Not using firewall yet as just got router yesterday, retail unit, not the crippled BT version
)
Win2k Server, Using inbuilt ICS
BlackIce Defender Server Firewall (A bit pants, Use ZApro normally, but have had 3 Dual CPU Servers now where the firewall freezes the Server solid whenever a web call is made through ICS. Latest ZA, Altering affinities on the za exe's used has made no difference either, fine on single cpu machines, but anyways......)
UT dedicated v4.36
Max Client Rate 5000
10 players total, bots make up numbers.
I connect on the LAN side and have 4 freinds that connect on the web side. 1 on Cable, 3 on modem set to 2600. 10 Players total, bots make up the numbers. What I find is that the modem clients connections vary, as you would expect, between 180-280 ping on their connections(going on F1 values), but some of them have worse links than others and stutter from time to time depending on their link that day.
I was planning on stepping the server down to NT4 sp6a, but wondered if any of you had advice on whether NT4 will help to reduce ping time slightly over 2K. Never really experienced the 'creeping ping' issues with 2K. Any improvement is worth it as far as I am concerned as I want the comms to be as quick as poss for them.
Thoughts gratefully recieved,
Cheers,
Nick
[Edited by Mr Footlong - 1/17/2002 12:31:07 AM]
I have a question for you.......
I have been running a dedicated UT server for about 6 months now and want to find out what you reckon is the best server OS to get the lowest pings possible for clients.
Server Setup:
Tyan Tiger MP Motherboard
Dual AMD Athlon 1.4 CPU
512Meg DDR
SCSI160 Hot Swap
D-Link DFE550TX Lan side
D-Link DFE530TX Web side
Efficient Networks EN5861 ADSL Router/Firewall (Not using firewall yet as just got router yesterday, retail unit, not the crippled BT version
)Win2k Server, Using inbuilt ICS
BlackIce Defender Server Firewall (A bit pants, Use ZApro normally, but have had 3 Dual CPU Servers now where the firewall freezes the Server solid whenever a web call is made through ICS. Latest ZA, Altering affinities on the za exe's used has made no difference either, fine on single cpu machines, but anyways......)
UT dedicated v4.36
Max Client Rate 5000
10 players total, bots make up numbers.
I connect on the LAN side and have 4 freinds that connect on the web side. 1 on Cable, 3 on modem set to 2600. 10 Players total, bots make up the numbers. What I find is that the modem clients connections vary, as you would expect, between 180-280 ping on their connections(going on F1 values), but some of them have worse links than others and stutter from time to time depending on their link that day.
I was planning on stepping the server down to NT4 sp6a, but wondered if any of you had advice on whether NT4 will help to reduce ping time slightly over 2K. Never really experienced the 'creeping ping' issues with 2K. Any improvement is worth it as far as I am concerned as I want the comms to be as quick as poss for them.
Thoughts gratefully recieved,
Cheers,
Nick
[Edited by Mr Footlong - 1/17/2002 12:31:07 AM]
17 January 2002, 12:43 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool. Thanks, should have been more specific in saying that is a toss up between NT4Server, 2KServer, .Net beta Server. This is my home server and still needs to provide Web comms, authentication etc for us at home. I haven't been swayed over to the dark side yet
, so Linux is not an option at the mo...
Cheers,
Nick
, so Linux is not an option at the mo...Cheers,
Nick
17 January 2002, 12:48 AM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Essex
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No no no no no Win2k not an option. I ran it on this for a while and its a disaster - the "creeping ping" problem. Could not resolve it. Worsens as users / bandwidth increases so you may not have run into it yet.
Currently run it on a FreeBSD box. Uses faff all cpu. BSD is the *best* OS for networking / TCP however its running UT in linux emulation mode. You'll find most decent servers are redhat linux.
I'm gonna put together a linux box soon for wolfenstein and I may move the ut.
Based on your options I'd say NT4. Keith runs an NT4 ut server and reckons its fine.
[Edited by Lee - 1/17/2002 12:50:34 AM]
Currently run it on a FreeBSD box. Uses faff all cpu. BSD is the *best* OS for networking / TCP however its running UT in linux emulation mode. You'll find most decent servers are redhat linux.
I'm gonna put together a linux box soon for wolfenstein and I may move the ut.
Based on your options I'd say NT4. Keith runs an NT4 ut server and reckons its fine.
[Edited by Lee - 1/17/2002 12:50:34 AM]
17 January 2002, 12:57 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Hants
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best thing u can do is remove UT and installed HL/CS.
Failing that....
What ASDL solution are u using? If its 512/256 then it would be good for 4-8 players max. Even bot/lan players location information still needs to be sent to all the people across the adsl connecting.
IMHO
Stop running other services on the server, eg web/ftp/mail.
Down your max rate to '3500'
Remove some of the bots.
Install Linux. (BSD is best networking but UT runs native on linux)
Failing that....
What ASDL solution are u using? If its 512/256 then it would be good for 4-8 players max. Even bot/lan players location information still needs to be sent to all the people across the adsl connecting.
IMHO
Stop running other services on the server, eg web/ftp/mail.
Down your max rate to '3500'
Remove some of the bots.
Install Linux. (BSD is best networking but UT runs native on linux)
17 January 2002, 01:31 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry about things running on the server. I am quite a 2K don, so the server is running as lean as she needs to. The UT is fine 99% of the time with all the bots, custom skins/voices, Strangelove2 mod, Superman mod, Smart Rockets II, real special ed UT CTF
. She handles it all brilliantly.
All I am really after is which of the NT-Based OS's would produce the lowest possible pings to help ensure overall best quality connections for the players. I am pretty sure that NT4's tcp is more efficient at this, but not sure....
CS? Not very likely!
Cheers,
Nick
. She handles it all brilliantly.All I am really after is which of the NT-Based OS's would produce the lowest possible pings to help ensure overall best quality connections for the players. I am pretty sure that NT4's tcp is more efficient at this, but not sure....
CS? Not very likely!
Cheers,
Nick
17 January 2002, 01:37 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, forgot to say, 512down/256up. Actual speeds are:
450-460Kbps down, 228-231Bbps up on normal days, not BT pants-adsl days.....
It is a private server so only 4 players know of it and come in on it.
Cheers,
Nick
450-460Kbps down, 228-231Bbps up on normal days, not BT pants-adsl days.....
It is a private server so only 4 players know of it and come in on it.
Cheers,
Nick
Trending Topics
17 January 2002, 07:42 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So that must mean you never get to play any decent players like me then
Rich.
http://www.clanvortex.co.uk
Rich.
http://www.clanvortex.co.uk
19 January 2002, 01:10 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers for the replies folks.
Weird results........
Using the new router instead of the ADSL USB modem on the server, the overall download and upload rates are lower
, with the router in standard passthrough mode and the inbuilt firewall completely disabled on the unit. I have gone down to NT4 and the comms have lowered yet again. Now I know my NT4 very well and she is set to run tcp comms as sweetly as poss, so god knows what is happening....... I have lost 90kbps off the download alone by dropping to NT4! Barmy as I was expecting the opposite.
Hehe, what the hell, Whistler Server Beta 2 next methinks, let's see what she does
Cheers,
Nick
Weird results........
Using the new router instead of the ADSL USB modem on the server, the overall download and upload rates are lower
, with the router in standard passthrough mode and the inbuilt firewall completely disabled on the unit. I have gone down to NT4 and the comms have lowered yet again. Now I know my NT4 very well and she is set to run tcp comms as sweetly as poss, so god knows what is happening....... I have lost 90kbps off the download alone by dropping to NT4! Barmy as I was expecting the opposite.Hehe, what the hell, Whistler Server Beta 2 next methinks, let's see what she does
Cheers,
Nick
20 January 2002, 12:50 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Richi, that is indeed true, I keep myself down in the Numpty leagues!
Well...... I have upped her to whistler beta 2 and she is stonking along! bandwidth down has gone back to 475kbps and upload is stable at 225kbps with steady pings. When you have powerful enough kit, Whistler flys along quite happily. None of the others have come on yet to try, due to me setting up the firewall side of the router today, hmmm, that was fun, not.
Cheers,
Nick
Well...... I have upped her to whistler beta 2 and she is stonking along!
bandwidth down has gone back to 475kbps and upload is stable at 225kbps with steady pings. When you have powerful enough kit, Whistler flys along quite happily. None of the others have come on yet to try, due to me setting up the firewall side of the router today, hmmm, that was fun, not.Cheers,
Nick
20 January 2002, 12:54 AM
#14
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Stalking Kate Beckinsale
Posts: 4,265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, it was altered with 2K, but I thought for the worse overall. I seem to be wrong, but I do also think that NT really wasn't able to harness/talk to that monster server optimally as it was perfectly stable, but disk/RAM/LAN throughput were noticably lower that with 2K, because It should have been just as good performance-wise, at least in my experience. Gonna leave whistler on, but preliminary tests and results look very good so far.
Cheers,
Nick
Cheers,
Nick
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post