Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Fierce Deity
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 20:46:00 -
[31]
quadruple post!
Kudos, To CCP for making sure everything is explained, and keeping us all in the loop. ------FD------
|
MysticNZ
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 20:53:00 -
[32]
If Max Tesla posts again i'm going to shoot myself.
Get Linux?
What the hell? It would have the same problems. Windows 2003 Datacentre can scale as good as linux, if not better.
The server code is coded for win32, get off the bandwagon.
Originally by: Nyphur I'm hungry and naked. That answer your question?
|
Treacle Shazboat
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 20:58:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Metzob I only have one question. What are you going to do when you break 25k concurrent? The way Eve has grown in the last 3 months that might not be that far away. In fact if Eve were capable of that right now without all the problems since patch, I believe you might have reached the 25k mark or atleast pretty close to it. Atleast 22.5k I bet. This game is exploding population wise and I hope your planning for more then 25k concurrent.
Final note: I know your doing everything you can and I applaud your efforts. Just want to point out that a lot of new trial people are very frustrated. Many old timers as well in fact. Not sure how many potential old/new customers you've lost, but I've seen half a dozen or so say they were quiting in just a couple of hours in local chat. Many players are trying to reassure new players and help them understand this happens sometimes with mmo's after a big patch especially. We point out that the game was very playable before the patch and that it will be again very soon. I know your doing everything you can at CCP, but just wanted to be sure you knew what was happening out there with the players. I personally hope to be here the day Eve hits over 100k concurrent In one world if that is possible.
Wow, exactly what I was going to post, but decided not to. I was thinking even farther ahead. What happens if EVE gets even close to the numbers WoW now has. Do you think you can handle 200,000 conncurrent users? There is a point at which a second cluster will be required, I just hope that you have planned for it when the time comes.
|
Mimio
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:15:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Treacle Shazboat
Originally by: Metzob I only have one question. What are you going to do when you break 25k concurrent? The way Eve has grown in the last 3 months that might not be that far away. In fact if Eve were capable of that right now without all the problems since patch, I believe you might have reached the 25k mark or atleast pretty close to it. Atleast 22.5k I bet. This game is exploding population wise and I hope your planning for more then 25k concurrent.
Final note: I know your doing everything you can and I applaud your efforts. Just want to point out that a lot of new trial people are very frustrated. Many old timers as well in fact. Not sure how many potential old/new customers you've lost, but I've seen half a dozen or so say they were quiting in just a couple of hours in local chat. Many players are trying to reassure new players and help them understand this happens sometimes with mmo's after a big patch especially. We point out that the game was very playable before the patch and that it will be again very soon. I know your doing everything you can at CCP, but just wanted to be sure you knew what was happening out there with the players. I personally hope to be here the day Eve hits over 100k concurrent In one world if that is possible.
Wow, exactly what I was going to post, but decided not to. I was thinking even farther ahead. What happens if EVE gets even close to the numbers WoW now has. Do you think you can handle 200,000 conncurrent users? There is a point at which a second cluster will be required, I just hope that you have planned for it when the time comes.
You are thinking that you are very clever boy? Hah, you are wrong.
WoW can handle 2500 concurrent users. Big part of them are instanced, because WoW cannot handle so much objects in one object space. Approximately ten times lesser than Eve. Feel The difference, boy!
|
Gunstar Zero
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:25:00 -
[35]
you can tell that when this is fixed next week, there's going to be serious Christmas drinking going on.
Cheers for the update
|
Siri Danae
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:26:00 -
[36]
All I know is I can still count the number of days I've had in 2005 with really bad connections on my hands, so CCP's efforts are appreciated. ------ I generally assume the following: 1. 95% of Empire Carebears don't get 0.0 PVPers. 2. 95% of 0.0 PVPers don't get Empire Carebears. 3. 100% of Ore Thieves steal just to upset the Miners. |
Kage Getsu
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:35:00 -
[37]
I know I've been *****ing about the font, but I do appreciate the time and effort that goes into giving us this game. Thanks CCP!
|
Mallikanth
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:35:00 -
[38]
I fully appreciatte and admire the dedication of the CCP staff and their families willingness and understanding at this time of year.
I detest these constant whiners at patch time. Some of you have dangerously low levels of social interaction and understanding. Others simply can't don't read any form of post before they rant. Many lie between these extremes.
Well done CCP and bloody good blog Hellmar.
* All Spelling mistakes are due to my high blood pressure reading posts in the forums these last few hours.
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move. - Douglas Adams
|
Elriond
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:40:00 -
[39]
i agree. thank you ccp for keeping us up to date with what's going on and what you plan to do. the forum posters are grating my nerves as well. seems every minute another whiner posts a new topic which gets spammed immediately. anyway, thank you again for rmr, i dont mind some bugginess for the new content.
|
HUGO DRAX
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:40:00 -
[40]
please dont do shards. even if it means a higher subscription fee to cover the costs of more equipment.
|
|
Jaabaa Prime
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:48:00 -
[41]
Nice to get this update.
But IMHO, Sisi testers can't generate the server load that is required. They don't "play" on Sisi, the fight on Sisi knowing that their losses won't effect their TQ game.
What you guys at CCP really need is a "test client cluster" (10-20 remote controlled PCs) to simulate thousands of users and stress test Sisi, no need for graphics, just the commands. Then use HW scaling to calculate the effectiveness of the code against the TQ cluster. ---------
|
Morkalum Takor
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 21:50:00 -
[42]
Originally by: HUGO DRAX please dont do shards. even if it means a higher subscription fee to cover the costs of more equipment.
I concur. Please don't shard EVE as a last resort. One of the key elements of this game that make it so darn amazing is that it all is in the same clustered server. Keep up the tedious work.
"There's more than one side to a story..."-Reporter for the InterCorp Courier Enterprises |
VinLieger
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 22:26:00 -
[43]
Interesting read. The one thing thats been annoying me most atm is the lack of info from devs thanks for the update
|
Thomdril Merrilin
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 22:34:00 -
[44]
Excellent, its good to hear that you've got it relatively under control.
Good job CCP (once again).
Originally by: Oveur EVE Online - even the forums have PVP
|
FireFoxx80
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 22:35:00 -
[45]
New server plans look good.
As to the person complaining it should have been on linux; stop being a fanboi.
I think any software developer has had a project that has had a major last-minute bug on release. I ran an assessment last week for 400 students, and as they were queuing up to take it, I realised the PCs in question wouldn't run the software.
23? # Missile Tool # ex: P-TMC : USAC |
Kula Alpha
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 22:35:00 -
[46]
Only Saturday afternoon, and the Monday morning quarterbacking is in full swing.
It's very difficult when you're the pioneer. There is no book to pull off the shelf to learn how to put 20K gamers on one server; when the book is written, it will be by or about these devs and their trials and triumphs.
Knowing when to ask, and whom to ask for assistance when things get hairy is one of the marks of the true professional.
The tech notes are very interesting. Please keep them up. As you fill out your application for the 500 Club, I expect they'll get VERY interesting.
Thanks for trying to deliver RMR for Christmas. And thanks for the effort, and please don't burn out, or neglect the families. You are entitled to lives too. Or so I've been told.
|
Hohenheim OfLight
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 22:55:00 -
[47]
Impresive
------------------------------------------------- Contribute to the buy Hohenheim a carrier fund in game now! |
Virida
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 23:12:00 -
[48]
Its impressive to see devlopers who try puching their server into the top 500 of supercomputer clusters
|
Tusko Hopkins
|
Posted - 2005.12.17 23:58:00 -
[49]
Tbh, I have a hard time understanding why simulating the world of EVE to lets say 15000 concurrent users is such a hard task. The game mechanics (the low level ones) of eve are extremely simple. The AI in the game is very simple, too. No big tactics, coordination of NPCs, player behaviour learning systems... the best proof for this is that there is still no pathfinding in the game (your player bumps everything, warp lanes are crossing planets). There is not much not player-driven activity to simulate. Planets are not orbiting the stars, moons are not orbiting the planets, stargates and stations are not orbiting the moons. The rocks in the belts are just standing there, too. The only part of the game which needs realtime simulation are the pilots, npcs, drones, missiles flying around in space, the rest of the things are not moving at all. Those which are flying around are not following any complicated patterns and collisions occure very rarely. One would guess that the most complicated and resource-eating part of the game has to do with the market. With all the regional and local markets, with all the trading skills, best price calculations, etc. But these kind of things would push the SQL the most, not the SOL servers. And from all you have told us before, my conclusion was that its the SOL servers which you have the most problems with. All of us has seen how much lag a fleet combat causes. What is extra in such situations? Instead of 20 ships in space you have 100, and you also have 50 drones and 30 missiles flying around which need their movement path to be calculated. There are also a few dozen shots every second but the hitting formulas are simple. None of the modules (EW) are modifying more than 2 values of the target ship. So this is what brings the SOL server to its knees? Hard to believe. The AI of Settlers back in 1995 was more complicated and was handling over 3000 units on the map without problems, all this on a 386. Please explain.
|
IronLord
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 00:00:00 -
[50]
Hi m8s
I usually stay out of the flaming, but indeed there is lack of information, if there was more info (I believe you guys have been in a madness fray of work during last days), maybe ppl would complain less, or maybe notà
I see all ppl complaining about this and that and this was nurfed and hat was nurfed, the lag this the lag that, do a roll back and stuff, etcà ifd ppl knew what is behind a game like EVE, if they could phantom the real complexity and balance of the technology, they would respect moreà
I do admire you in guys in Dev team cos I'm a game developer and I don't know how you handle the pressure you are put at the forums, your CEOÆs must be MAD and NURFING you all along.
Take your time just let ppl check on the stuffs progress and ignore threats and stupidity all along because it only means they are really desiring to play EVE no matter what..
Keep up one of the best and most complex game I ever playedà.
|
|
fuze
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 00:26:00 -
[51]
Originally by: HUGO DRAX please dont do shards. even if it means a higher subscription fee to cover the costs of more equipment.
So you want CCP to have more people ingame and barely handling all the data. They bought some state of the art hardware to handle that. As a developer I'd say there is something wrong with the design. Getting new customers is important. Keeping the current ones too.
If it is true CCP is using SQL server I'd say ditch that and get something state of the art to match that harddisk array. I'm currently working in a project of 20Bn GBP as a developer and they don't use SQL server.
And still if they shard a chinese server any statement of not sharding is completely useless. Sharding Eve can be a smart move for CCP. And if you take Sisi in account sharding is already happening right this moment. Cuz lotsa peeps use it to test their shiploads. ___________________________ Favorite bumpersticker of the month: Take me to your dealer. |
Caius LiviusCerso
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 01:36:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Hellspawn01 Something I really like to know about CCP and this talk about free extensions is, will you give us some infos about the costs of the server atm and future costs, maybe some looks into CCP financial situation?
Is CCP thinkng about goping IPO?
I'd surely love to take a few shares in my wallet...
|
Caius LiviusCerso
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 01:43:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Morkalum Takor
Originally by: HUGO DRAX please dont do shards. even if it means a higher subscription fee to cover the costs of more equipment.
I concur. Please don't shard EVE as a last resort. One of the key elements of this game that make it so darn amazing is that it all is in the same clustered server. Keep up the tedious work.
Don't break this wonderful, amazing virtual space. If you do, I'll quit.
We are writing history, and I'm proud to be there. Charge me more, but don't fragment us like stupid WOW does!!
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 01:51:00 -
[54]
FIX THIS you noobs:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=261311
How many pages does it take before the problem is acknowledged?
|
Ambrose
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 03:17:00 -
[55]
Maybe they thought EW was overpowered and nerfed it intentionally.
|
Bongo Smith
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 06:41:00 -
[56]
Dare I say it? Yes: Kick out the thousand ISK farmers / macro miners mining 23/7 and you'll see a drastic drop in server loads. You'll lose paying accounts, but you'll save the money when you don't have to upgrade the servers yet.
A normal customer plays a few hours per day, tops. Macro miners "play" for 23/7. They create a disproportionate amount of net traffic (for which you pay) and server load (for which we all pay) compared to "normal" players. So when those lost macro accounts eventually get replaced by real players, you'll get the same income with lesser server/network load.
|
sonofollo
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 07:43:00 -
[57]
all this good stuff - how about ingame communication channels - recruitment for starters
|
Tusko Hopkins
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 10:00:00 -
[58]
Fuze: I have also made some thoughts about why it might be inefficient. I would not suggest them to scrap the SQL because it might be an old concept, but its proven and efficient. There are more "state of the art" stuff, they could go for cubes or oo databases but I do not think it would help them and it would introduce new problems as they are just not as proven yet. Besides, based what they said, the bottleneck is not on the SQL side. You also mentioned that there might be problems with the system architecture. That's possible as we don't know all the details. Based on a few older blogs about the SQL, the SOLs and the proxies, one would think that the system architecture is thought-through... but who knows the details. I have 2 guesses for the performance problems: 1) There must be some very basic thing in the server code which is incredibly inefficient. Maybe because it was rushed when the game was being developed, or maybe because their stackless Python thingy. I don't know how many % of their server code was written in Python (I hope not all of it), but I think that's a possible explanation 2) I've seen a few signs in game (determined from what operations take how long) which suggests that the SQL <=> SOL synchronization is sometimes very wasteful. There are a lot more data being synced than necessary. Best example for this is the addressbook management. If you have like 1000 faces in it (yes, I have many friends by BoB, and .5.), its a real pain to delete them all. The more friends you have, the longer it takes to delete a single one of them. By 1000 faces it takes 15 seconds to delete a buddy, but if you only have like 300, you can delete one every second. This makes me guess that the addressbook (possibily the entire character?) is re-loaded upon every buddylist operation which just... sucks. If there are many things working in a similar way in the server side code, that can explain a lot.
|
sonofollo
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 10:03:00 -
[59]
i think that exponential affect is the result of server side everything - security reasons of course as well to prevent hacks CCP please restore the recruitment channel |
Fallout2man
|
Posted - 2005.12.18 10:33:00 -
[60]
Originally by: fuze Edited by: fuze on 18/12/2005 00:55:42
Originally by: HUGO DRAX please dont do shards. even if it means a higher subscription fee to cover the costs of more equipment.
So you want CCP to have more people ingame and barely handling all the data. They bought some state of the art hardware to handle that. As a developer I'd say there is something wrong with the design. Getting new customers is important. Keeping the current ones too.
If it is true CCP is using SQL server I'd say ditch that and get something state of the art to match that harddisk array. I'm currently working in a project of 20Bn GBP as a developer and they don't use SQL server.
And still if they shard a chinese server any statement of not sharding is completely useless. Sharding Eve can be a smart move for CCP. And if you take Sisi in account sharding is already happening right this moment. Cuz lotsa peeps use it to test their shiploads.
And I personally think CCP shouldn't let more people in the game because of lag issues all the time. They always have been here since beta. But in 3 years you'd reckon they were on top of the problem by now. And getting some new extra hardware shouldn't be a problem with over 70k customers paying their fees every month. If they could double that by installing a 2nd shard it would be economically feasable.
Something very VERY crucial that people must understand. CCP cannot avoid sharding a chinese server. Not for technological reasons however. I've no doubt they could handle the load. They must shard the chinese server for political reasons. To legally sell software in china they're being required to modify their games by the department of culture to limit game time and I imagine as well so the chinese government can snoop on whomever they wish.
Obviously they'd never subject non-chinese players to such grossly invasive and counter-productive and freedom/privacy destroying measures. However if they wish to sell software in china, they cannot avoid it. Therefore, the only sane choice is to shard the chinese server and meet the chinese government's time-limit and snooping requirements while allowing non-chinese players to play in an environment where their privacy is protected and they're not nannied by a government that thinks it knows what's best.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |