Brutal Legend sends 30 updates a second for 4 players or less reliably with no problems. For 5 or more, we go down to 15 packets a second (although each packet contains 2 game-messages) to reduce the UDP/VDP/eNet overhead. If you're sending this many updates, the main consumer of bandwidth is the headers, so be very careful that you're sending your enet ACKs in the same packet as your next send. You can tell if this is the case using any wire sniffer and seeing if you're firing 30 or 60 UDP frames per second. If it's 60, you need to process incoming messages before sending new ones and flushing.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Chris Meub <[email protected]> wrote: > Does anyone have experience using enet with a multiplayer game sending > reliable packets ~20 times a second or more? > I imagine most people sending that many packets are using unreliable. > > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Lee Salzman <[email protected]> wrote: > > No, the point is to get all available packets in this frame and not > stall, > > i.e. it is polling. You wouldn't use a non-zero timeout in a game's > client > > loop like that. > > > > Lee > > > > On 11/21/2010 02:31 PM, Mark Palkow wrote: > > > > Couldn't the problem be > > > > while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 0) > 0 ) > > > > because it takes all the CPU (100%)? > > shouldn't it be something like: > > > > while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 10) > 0 ) > > > > so that the CPU gets a chance to handle other task like the network > stack? > > regards Mark > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] > > Im Auftrag von Chris Meub > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. November 2010 08:39 > > An: Discussion of the ENet library > > Betreff: Re: [ENet-discuss] 4 seconds stalls.. congestion problem? > > > > I am doing this every 1/60th second: > > > > while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 0) > 0 ) > > { > > switch (event.type) > > { > > case ENET_EVENT_TYPE_RECEIVE: > > // ( handle packet ) > > enet_packet_destroy (event.packet); > > break; > > case ENET_EVENT_TYPE_DISCONNECT: // (handle disconnect > here) > > } > > } > > > > As I understand it that will process all available events. > > > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Lee Salzman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > In the client, make sure you repeatedly call enet_host_service() until it > > returns no events, otherwise it may possibly not service the network at > > > > > > all > > > > > > if it gets backlogged. > > > > Lee > > > > On 11/20/2010 07:41 PM, Chris Meub wrote: > > > > It does *not* exhibit the stalling behavior when I run on LAN or on > > the same machine. > > > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Jay Sprenkle <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > Have you tried running both on the same physical machine, or on two > > > > > > machines > > > > > > within your control? > > Perhaps it's caused by comcast equipment. > > > > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Chris Meub <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > The server is hosted on a dedicated hosting provider M5, but I have > > also tried putting the server on a friend's home Ubuntu server with > > the exact same intermittent stalling behavior. > > > > The client is under a router and cable modem with comcast > > > > pinging the server averages 49ms at the moment, 32ms from another > > network ive tested > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ENet-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ENet-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss >
_______________________________________________ ENet-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
