[Kuros]

PeterBeater said:

well the server has been having alot more lag spikes lately, where everyone on the server freezes for a few seconds or whatever.

 

That’s because the servers are full, not because of the ticrate. The lagspikes would be worse if the ticrate were higher.

[Kuros]

rainefardreamer said:

my ping has doubled to 20ish, which isn’t a big deal, but it looks like that happened to most people, but since its temporary i don’t care that much

 

Even at 20 ping the CPU is processing data more quickly then you are sending it. This pretty much nullifies the ticrate change. There are other minor factors but for the most part, for anyone that thinks that you see a difference, it’s in your head 100%.

[Kuros]

There is no difference for just about anyone but on campus students and even then the difference shouldn’t even be noticeable.

[Kuros]

Derrick LeBrocq said:

Is this a recommendation from experience? I’ve heard music isn’t the best on these, and the bass apparently bloze.

 

I got my Sennheiser over those. My particular Senns are USB but the regular ones are just as nice.

[Kuros]

Citan001 said:

I know this is the second time they told me i was gonna die and i beat it once i hope i can do it again. It just feels different this time though. My body actually feels weak now.

 

Before surgery, I felt weak and sick to my stomach all the time. After surgery it was all I could to do breathe for 3 days, I couldn’t move around or do anything and nurses constantly came in *edited*ing because I kept getting a fever because I couldn’t breathe.

 

My point is, you’re going to feel weak, that’s part of it. I think surviving is 90% mentality 10% medicine. Keep your head up.

[Kuros]

I survived and so can you! (parathyroid, you learn something new everyday). Just don’t let it get you down. You have to keep a positive mentality and you have to have the will to fight. I was too hard headed to let a *edited*ty gland in my neck get cancerous and kill me even though it tried really hard.

[Kuros]

Honestly at this point I’m just arguing to be arguing. I think the upgrade to 15k disks make this a moot point. I’m 99.999% sure that Trons disks are 10k.

[Kuros]

All you need is one back up every time something significantly changes. The only thing you actually lose is logs.

[Kuros]

MasterP said:

Why on earth would you recommend not having parity on a production server?

 

It’s processing a metric *edited*ton of data on the fly. If it were like…a db server or exchange server or app server then no *edited*ing way. But it’s not. It’s actually permanently storing a very small amount of data that could easily be recovered.

[Kuros]

Nickname said:

its real raid with 128mb ram. And no you couldnt continue on with the single drive unless your formatted and you would have to format again when you introduced the second drive if you use raid 0.

 

Nice on the real raid and yes that’s correct on the double format. Guess we’ll just have to see how it goes.

[Kuros]

Nickname said:

I know you didnt. I just said that for others who aren’t you/me/kip.

As far as the redundancy… if we RAID 0 and a drive dies… we have to wait to get a replacement before we can continue on. with RAID 1 if the drive dies we can keep going while we wait for the replacement.

 

But yes, we should still be making backups in other places.

 

You can continue on with the single drive as far as that goes. Failure rates aren’t uber high. Also, is it true hardware raid or fake raid? Onboard=fakeraid.

[Kuros]

Nickname said:

Additional comments:

 

-RAID1 performance is virtually identical to that of a single drive setup. Thousands of benchmarks online will support that fact so I am not going to post an arbitraty one here but think about it: all it does is the raid controller mirrors to the second drive whatever is done on the first drive. That second drive doesn’t impact performance at all.

 

-the VMs caused such disk issues because they had lots of small disk writes… write performance of small files of RAID 5 is its achilles heel, so that likely will account for the issue there.

 

I never said Raid 1 was slower than a single disk access. I said it was slower than 5 and 0. What’s the benefit of going 1 over 0? You can make backups (and should be making them). So I don’t see redundancy being a problem.

[Kuros]

I guess since this is a public thread I will explain in more detail for the less computer savvy. Kip and Nickname *should* already know this. What happened in the past was that the Virtual Machines (we would be substituting additional servers for VMs, so again you can’t call this argument invalid because there are no VMs) would demand a huge chunk of read or write space. Typical I/O on the drives is relatively low and it streams along reading and writing data in a pretty quick fashion because of it’s striping capabilities. The idea behind a stripe is that it’s faster for 2 hard drives to store half a file at the same time than one drive to store the whole thing at one time. (That’s simplified but basically how it works, and the theory makes perfect sense.) The setup they are proposing will read/write an ENTIRE file or request to EACH disk. While this does give us data redundancy it’s pretty *edited*ing slow. Anyways, back to the VMs. What would happen is that the VMs (or new servers in our case) would request a larger than ordinary chunk of read/write. Then what happens is that the disk cannot fulfill that request immediately so it hangs up other read/writes and queues them up so that it can process the large request. It creates sort of a bottleneck until the large write (up to 200GB/s I’ve seen) gets shoved through, then it can continue on with the requests that it had to queue up until it catches back up. So what happens when that fat file blocks up the proverbial bottle? You get lag spikes and poor shot registration because a lot of that data getting queued up is your 1.6 and CSS server.

 

That in a nutshell, is the problem with going with a mirroring set over a striping one. While a stripe may require occasional backups, it would be worth the gain in performance.

 

EDIT 1: I hope dear Bitey, this fulfills your request.

 

EDIT 2: Just thought of another problem which would be the way Windows Server likes to page every *edited*ing thing ever rather than use the 16GB of RAM. While Linux server would eliminate this I am 100% against putting Linux server on the new box. (Even being a Linux user myself). It’s simply hit or miss on whether or not our successors will be able to use it and it’s minimal teaching them to do things in Windows Server.

[Kuros]

Bitey said:

Don’t do that, we all know you do have experience running a gaming server. Make your point about why it is better to do it your way, “Stop being a negative nancy”.

 

They very well know why a stripe set will see better performance than a mirroring set. Because at this very minute they aren’t seeing disk problems, it means the countless hours I spent watching system monitor don’t mean anything. I wouldn’t have brought it up if I didn’t know what I was talking about. I’m not inventing problems. Yes there are no HDD problems right this very minute. We are also in a RAID5 setup. When the VMs were there, there were major I/O problems. No there will not be VMs on the new box, but at the same time I doubt you’re buying it to run the same 5 servers we have now. I would imagine we would be opening up 2nd 1.6 and CSS servers to meet population demands. These additional servers require more I/O. We are already moving to a slower disk set…why make it even worse when it’s been a problem in the past.

[Kuros]

Sennhieser makes one that’s pretty awesome. Those dDimensional ones are *edited*.

[Kuros]

Nickname said:

We’re not, idk wtf Kuros is talking about. CPU power != hard drive rates

 

Problems that were very prevalent in the past. But if you want to jam a bunch of servers on a mirroring set be my guest. Since I don’t know anything I am going to stop posting in these threads. I have no experience running gaming servers.

[Kuros]

http://mono-project.com/Mod_mono

[Kuros]

Nickname said:

what they (systems) want:

 

 

We are trying to convince them to get the dual quad core Intel Nehalem-based server instead so we will see.

 

Since we are having drive problems on some pretty fast drives already, you may want to change that raid 1 set up to raid 5 and include a stripe. Two identical full file writes are way *edited*ing slower than one file stripe with parity. You have a raid controller so it does the work instead of the CPU, so there is no excuse not to get the extra drive. I’m just saying…also Intel over the Opterons.

[Kuros]

In computer networking, localhost (meaning “this computer”) is the standard hostname given to the address of the loopback network interface.

 

I’m just saying. IIS makes the computer browsable as long as you have the pages you want to be able to browse to in the IIS browsable directories. C:\Inetpub\wwwroot by default.

[Kuros]

Bottom line for HDD performance: (my top 5)

 

1. SATA > IDE.

2. When possible RAID5. You get fast striping and parity all in one super nifty bundle. (Requires 3 drives and you get the space of the smallest drive x2).

3. Defragment often. It keeps big files together and helps the OS queue them in HDD cache.

4. Drives with larger caches are faster

5. More RPMs=much quicker read and write times.

 

So basically, a Raid5 array of 3 7200 (or more) rpm SATA drives with 16mb or better cache that you frequently defragment will give you about the best performance you are going to see from your drives. My computer scored 5.9 on Windows Experience Index for hard drives. See appropriate thread in Hardware for details.

[Kuros]

Bananarchy said:

So, let me preface this by saying, yes, it involves me playing WOW. Blah blah blah I suck, ect. I get it.

 

Anyway, as you may know my raided hard drives got wtf pwnt over the winter solstice holidays and I lost all my data. Everything is fine now, and I have successful reinstalled everything important that i need. I have noticed a slowdown in performance however, especially when i play WOW. Now, i know it’s not a latency issue, so i think the choppiness of the game must be due to reduced processing performance. Anyway, i was wondering if any aspect of replacing my 2 newer hard drives with a singles older hard drive could be to blame. Your thoughts? Also, just fyi my comp is a 4 year old Dell xps. with a 3.2 ghz processor.

 

Yes. Especially if they used to be in raid 0. But still yes either way.

[Kuros]

xenocide said:

Hi, I’ve received to PM’s from mignulikz recently that appear to be spam. Both had embedded URL links to different variations of the same (seemingly) bogus URL. I didn’t click on the links, but I think he’s trying to get ppl to click on bad links. Please delete his account, if you find it necessary.

 

Protip: Do a search before you post things. Chances are if it’s spam, someone else got it too.

 

Ephraim…please repost the video to forum rules.

[Kuros]

Citan001 said:

I hate american muscle. Its to easy to drop a big old v8 into a car and say oh look it can go int a straight line really fast….nothing against american auto makers at all I love chevy but imports are way better right now.

 

Imports invented “drifting” because they couldn’t beat American muscle in a straight line really fast.

 

Protip: American cars have been “drifting” since 1948.

 

Derrick L. said:

Kuros, is your avatar from advent children??

 

Yes it is.

 

NoDice said:

looks like a good place to repost my setup

 

* AUZA Uber Extreme LAX 991

* Intel Core Quadro FZ9850

* Extremeair XMradio222 Dominator Series

* 4088x 311 mb Eastern Analog in RIOT 5

* NotaATIvidia Feforce Ultra Quiet 97trillion Superticked STi hopefullt its HDCP without much Interface

 

Your rig officially just owned everything in here put together.

[Kuros]

NoDice said:

MP room lan = best lan ever

 

The xbox winner got a pc case fan. That was epic.

[Kuros]

I used to build cars. Now I hate them. Once I ripped a 78 camaro from window to window. Not fun. Last engine chassis dyno at 596 rwhp. 1970 z28, nice rare car.

[Kuros]

Let me point out that I’m not saying that you don’t have better parts than I do. (Better set up is debatable) I’m just saying that there is absolutely no reason for me to spend money on an upgrade anytime soon. It would be absolutely POINTLESS.

[Kuros]

 

Looks like I win.

[Kuros]

Derrick L. said:

The same games at higher resolution:P

 

haha

 

I can play any of my games at 1680×1050 (native monitor) or 1920×1080 (my tv’s native resolution) at vsync. So…yeah…I ask again. What can yours do that mine cannot?

[Kuros]

Derrick L. said:

Thats awfully great, but…I see your setup, and raise you a monster:

 

Intel Quad Core i7 3.2ghz

Gigabyte DS3R-P45 mobo

8GB G-SKILL 1033mhz Super sync, with extra heat sinks

2xATI Radeon HD4870, 1 512mb, 1 1GB.

HDD: 2x500GB SATA2 WD Caviar, 1x2TB NAS, 1×2 bay enclosure, with 2TB, and my home server pc, that has 2x750gb SATA2 WD Caviar’s.

 

 

Plus…there’s my case…

http://ncix.com/products/?sku=21737&vp…cture=LIAN%2DLI

 

That’s how I roll.

 

And what will yours run that mine will not?

[Kuros]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450 OC 3.2 ghz

XFX Nvidia 780i SLI mobo

4GB Corsiar XMMS2 ocd 4-3-3-9. 800mhz for 1:1 sync with CPU

VC – Evga 9800gx2 (wish I had bought a 280 but meh)

HDD 3x 250GB Seagate Barracuda (normally in RAID 5)

 

 

I had the option of upgrading to Core i7 earlier this year and decided it would be a waste of time. Tell me what this setup couldn’t run?

[Author]

Posts