| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reicine Ceer
Rodents of Unusual Size
The Rat Race
67
   |
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night. |
Mallak Azaria
563
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Reicine Ceer wrote: I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW?
Who cares. Spaceships are a million times cooler.
Mining Barge buff: CCP-áhas acknowledged that miners in general-áare too stupid to make the correct fitting choices to make ganking them unprofitable. |
highonpop
Eve Liberation Force
Fatal Ascension
217
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night.
Well, TiDi works per server node (IIRC, or maybe per system), not per gate. Traffic control is the mechanic that keeps gates from melting. But I'm sure that the server could handle much much much more than it is right now, since you can go to areas of eve to are totally empty during certain time zones.
http://www.soundboard.com/sb/Very%20best%20of%20Makalu%20Zarya |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
325
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night.
TQ isn't one server but a whole farm of them - you have the proxy servers which handle the connections to the clients, you have the sol servers each of which hosts one or more solar systems and you have the database servers that everything talks to.
For some outdated numbers see:
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility#Current_capability_01-13-2011_from_CCP_Yokai
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
4597
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Noone knows. With TiDi in place possibly many 100k but then ofc it could be slowed down so much a DT hits...
We're still holding the highest number of battle participants afaik?
|
|
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
929
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
Current record recorded http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/server_status.php
was 63,165 at once.
An average peek for a WoW server is like 750. |
Tiger Would
EoE-Group
1108
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night. TQ isn't one server but a whole farm of them - you have the proxy servers which handle the connections to the clients, you have the sol servers each of which hosts one or more solar systems and you have the database servers that everything talks to. For some outdated numbers see: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility#Current_capability_01-13-2011_from_CCP_Yokai
But are those nodes physical?
Because, I dont know, I t could be a virtualized environment, it would make sense in a load balancing energy usage kind of way. ( But also storage and bandwidth between DB and nodes (CUCS))
I could easily be wrong though.
Once you think you have it all, you-áhave actually become-áignorant towards everything else.
T. Would |
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
657
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 18:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
its enough that if the entire userbase logged in right now it would be fine. as long as those people aren't all in the same play anyway. |
Malphilos
State War Academy
Caldari State
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 19:01:00 -
[9] - Quote
Its capacity for love is boundless. |
baltec1
Bat Country
1919
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 19:04:00 -
[10] - Quote
Chribba wrote:
We're still holding the highest number of battle participants afaik?
Haven't heard of anything coming close. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
1875
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 20:44:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hooray! Eve holds more! :trollface: |
Denidil
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
484
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tiger Would wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night. TQ isn't one server but a whole farm of them - you have the proxy servers which handle the connections to the clients, you have the sol servers each of which hosts one or more solar systems and you have the database servers that everything talks to. For some outdated numbers see: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility#Current_capability_01-13-2011_from_CCP_Yokai But are those nodes physical? Because, I dont know, I t could be a virtualized environment, it would make sense in a load balancing energy usage kind of way. ( But also storage and bandwidth between DB and nodes (CUCS)) I could easily be wrong though.
they're not virtualized
If you don't see a problem in 0.0 eroding into two big super-coalitions and a few hangers on in areas nobody cares about.. then you don't have brains. |
Jimmy Gunsmythe
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
144
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:21:00 -
[13] - Quote
Take the maximum number of allowed people in a system, say Jita and multiply that by the number of systems in game. That's your maximum amount of people allowed on one server.
A good predator knows how to live in balance with his prey, lest he follow them into oblivion. |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration
Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
1010
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
Jimmy Gunsmythe wrote:Take the maximum number of allowed people in a system, say Jita and multiply that by the number of systems in game. That's your maximum amount of people allowed on one server.
Bad math. They don't have a server for every system. Some servers hold multiple systems.
|
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
125
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
Jimmy Gunsmythe wrote:Take the maximum number of allowed people in a system, say Jita and multiply that by the number of systems in game. That's your maximum amount of people allowed on one server.
Dont use Jita, remember it has its own node. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
Still Censored
660
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:34:00 -
[16] - Quote
Think it's really based off of how spread out people are. The true "max" would be very high though it would never reach that point because it would crash long before then. |
Blane Xero
The Firestorm Cartel
56
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:40:00 -
[17] - Quote
Perhaps for a low to mid population Realm.
Try 2-3k per faction peak per realm.
Resident Haruhiist since December 2008.
Laying claim to Out of Pod Experience since 2007, plain and simple.
Keep the trash out of Out Of Pod Experience, If it's EVE Related or deserves a Lock, it does not belong here. |
Tiger Would
EoE-Group
1109
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 21:58:00 -
[18] - Quote
Denidil wrote:Tiger Would wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night. TQ isn't one server but a whole farm of them - you have the proxy servers which handle the connections to the clients, you have the sol servers each of which hosts one or more solar systems and you have the database servers that everything talks to. For some outdated numbers see: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility#Current_capability_01-13-2011_from_CCP_Yokai But are those nodes physical? Because, I dont know, I t could be a virtualized environment, it would make sense in a load balancing energy usage kind of way. ( But also storage and bandwidth between DB and nodes (CUCS)) I could easily be wrong though. they're not virtualized
If so, it might not be a bad idea to start thinking about that.....
VMWare has very nifty options in CUCS, QOS mechanics on IO for example....
Infiniband between physical and virtual nodes (traffic wise, maybe not needed, but latencies drop conciderably)
Huge bandwidth between storage and nodes
Energy usage drops concidrable if you let DRS also look at loads and start migrating nodes when only 20k people are online and switch on physical nodes and migrate again when the counter goes up.
Also CPU resource pooling could overcome the single core (ok now they sidebanded some traffic to a second core) limitations for quite a bit
and so on.....
ah well.....it works like it is....
Once you think you have it all, you-áhave actually become-áignorant towards everything else.
T. Would |
Jimmy Gunsmythe
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
144
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
Gogela wrote:Jimmy Gunsmythe wrote:Take the maximum number of allowed people in a system, say Jita and multiply that by the number of systems in game. That's your maximum amount of people allowed on one server. Bad math. They don't have a server for every system. Some servers hold multiple systems.
We're talking about THE server, not all the little nodes. And I threw Jita out there just because its the only one that ever seems to get full. I know its not a perfect method, but its something.
A good predator knows how to live in balance with his prey, lest he follow them into oblivion. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
937
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:20:00 -
[20] - Quote
TQ Level Up
CCP Yokai wrote:TQ Tech Details: (Not the whole system, just what runs TQ)
Servers
64 x IBM HS21
2x Dual Core 3.33GHz CPU's
32GB of RAM Each
1x72GB HDD Each
2 x IBM X3850 M2's
2x Six Core 2.66GHz
128GB of RAM
4 x 146GB HDD
Cores
- 280 total Cores
- ~1 THz
RAM
- 2.3TB of Total RAM
Storage
- 4.8TB of Local Storage
- 2TB of SSD SAN
- 256GB of RAM SAN
Network
- Gigabit Ethernet
- 4Gb/s Fiber Channel
|
James 315
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
2436
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:24:00 -
[21] - Quote
The capacity is functionally infinite. The more players they get, the more subscriptions, the more money, the more server upgrades... The income they get will always outstrip the extra demand on the server.
The only place where they get into trouble is when too many people appear unexpectedly at the same location. With warning, they can reinforce the node or even build a separate node for a system (like Jita). But as we used to see in nullsec fleet fights, and even during the Burn Jita event, capacity is an issue if they don't have time to prepare.
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ MinerBumping.com -½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½The daily saga of one man's quest to bring civilization to highsec by bumping miners out of range. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
577
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
Tiger Would wrote:Denidil wrote:Tiger Would wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Reicine Ceer wrote:By that, I mean, what is the maximum number of players the server could handle before failing? I'm just curious.... I wonder how it compares to a single server in WoW? Whether TiDi would need to be implemented at every gate if the server reached maximum capacity? Or would CCP end up just getting a beefier server?
...these are the things that keep me awake at night. TQ isn't one server but a whole farm of them - you have the proxy servers which handle the connections to the clients, you have the sol servers each of which hosts one or more solar systems and you have the database servers that everything talks to. For some outdated numbers see: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tranquility#Current_capability_01-13-2011_from_CCP_Yokai But are those nodes physical? Because, I dont know, I t could be a virtualized environment, it would make sense in a load balancing energy usage kind of way. ( But also storage and bandwidth between DB and nodes (CUCS)) I could easily be wrong though. they're not virtualized If so, it might not be a bad idea to start thinking about that..... VMWare has very nifty options in CUCS, QOS mechanics on IO for example.... Infiniband between physical and virtual nodes (traffic wise, maybe not needed, but latencies drop conciderably) Huge bandwidth between storage and nodes Energy usage drops concidrable if you let DRS also look at loads and start migrating nodes when only 20k people are online and switch on physical nodes and migrate again when the counter goes up. Also CPU resource pooling could overcome the single core (ok now they sidebanded some traffic to a second core) limitations for quite a bit And it is where IT is headed, para virtualization has reached limitations, binary translation can still grow, but hardware virtualization is just around the corner and partially already supported on some CPU's. (partially run code on CPU instead of hypervisor level) Not to mention a much much lower COS (less physycal but beavier servers) less rack space, less cooling capacity needed, less UPS capacity, much lower power consumption etc and so on..... ah well.....it works like it is....
Actually, they are virtualised at the node level (though I can't find the reference. Dev blog or fanfest presentation. Possibly a Tidi one)
The nodes can be moved around as needed. Though they can't, yet, split systems from heavily loaded nodes.
FuzzWork Enterprises
http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Blueprint calculator, invention chance calculator, isk/m3 Ore chart-á and other 'useful' utilities. |
Tiger Would
EoE-Group
1110
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:34:00 -
[23] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Actually, they are virtualised at the node level (though I can't find the reference. Dev blog or fanfest presentation. Possibly a Tidi one)
The nodes can be moved around as needed. Though they can't, yet, split systems from heavily loaded nodes.
makes sense, i did not want to doubt the nay sayer without knowing so left it in the middle
Once you think you have it all, you-áhave actually become-áignorant towards everything else.
T. Would |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
505
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 22:45:00 -
[24] - Quote
I require clarification: number of players or girth of players? |
Jett0
Surface Warfare
Tribal Band
239
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 23:53:00 -
[25] - Quote
Considering Dust will run on TQ, I imagine the servers are very capable.
Occasionally plays sober |
Barakach
R-ISK
Shadow Operations.
70
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 02:44:00 -
[26] - Quote
I'm curious how they have their processing done. Modern CPUs are thread-strong, but I wonder how much critical code paths would hurt multi-threading.
One thing I've leaved about writing scalable code is learning when you don't need something "perfect". Many times I've found that preserving order or whatever is "nice", but not a requirement. Little things like this have allowed me to write much more scalable code.
It's not a "Race Condition", it's a "feature"! |
Dennis Gregs
The Scope
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 03:22:00 -
[27] - Quote
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
An average peek for a WoW server is like 750.
The server capacity (amount of logged-in players needed to reach a "full" status with a queue) was never that low, and they increased the capacity with both Burning Crusade and Wrath of the Lich King. A WoW 'realm' currently can definitely carry 3500 people, if not more. I've heard it used to be a lot more but they reduced it due to issues, but it's all speculation.
However, due to the fact that a WoW 'realm' is a significantly smaller server cluster than what EVE's is, if you stockpile even only 500 people in the same place you start getting issues, and 500 might be generous. |
Pipa Porto
822
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 04:44:00 -
[28] - Quote
Blane Xero wrote:Perhaps for a low to mid population Realm. After doing some looking into it, EU High pop realms average out to about 2k~ combined, with peaks of 4k~. [Sampled with info from Argent Dawn EU.]
That's pretty cool. Some of EVE's battles have been bigger than WOW Servers.
EvE: Everyone vs Everyone
-RubyPorto |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger
Ev0ke
310
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 05:16:00 -
[29] - Quote
tq can probably manage more than double the current player activities before devs get nervous about server performance. throwing large amounts of new hardware on the problem will take the pressure for quite some time.
excluded are large numbers of players in a specific location, or even worse, these players switching locations (grids or worse, systems). These problems could possibly be solved by working on the code itself or underlying mechanics, as mentioned by veritas at fanfest, he was talking about 'brain in a box', a new way of calculating how a players actions are influenced by skills, implants and projected effects. right now this happens on the same server as everything else, in a (far) future eve that would be done separate from combat |
Herr Hammer Draken
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
90
|
Posted - 2012.08.22 05:24:00 -
[30] - Quote
I am going to say we are nearly at capacity right now. I say that because on a daily basis Jita trips the TiDi feature already.
Now what will happen to EVE if we get say 100,000 accounts active on EVE at once? Well at least 40,000 of them will be in Jita all at the same time. Because it is what people will do go to Jita. Everybody goes to Jita. What wil that be like? I guess TiDi can slow it down enough that 1 second of game time will take 1 hour of real time to play. So a trip from undock to the exit gate out of the system takes what about 90 seconds of game time hey only 90 hours of real time after TiDi kicks in to handle the mad rush of players in Jita.
So yea we can take as many people as we want in EVE just need to be online forever when you go to Jita.
Herr Hammer Draken
"The Amarr Prophet" |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |