Brian wrote: Heres something that may prove interesting. If cpu reporting for hlds is innaccurte in older kernels then so should it be innaccurate for other apps, like TOP itself. How much CPU does top use on your system?
Well as I stated earlier, you can see various "top" usage at different hz. At 700-1000hz, top says it uses 20-40% cpu. At 100-500hz it says it uses nothing. Top shouldn't use much cpu, I just think the whole reporting of the VM proc in 2.4.9 is faulty. Software measuring it is right im sure, but I think the VM itself does not show proper information. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Stollar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 12:24 PM Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>I am telling you, and PROVING to you, that using this kernel, with DEFAULT > >>kernel timings results in performance vastly superior to any kernel > >>released after. > > > When we all know it is just impossible for the 1% you quote to be true. > > I fully ACK Jeremy. This is not possible, no way. The new VM started > with 2.4.10 was (after some bugs) superior as the old VM. Proved by > application benchmarks. And the new scheduler in 2.6. adds even more > power to the kernel. Why should all other applications gain from the new > VM besides HL? Indeed why should a kernel which only 'manages' the > ressources be guilty for a userspace programm needing 1/10 of the CPU > Power. The calculations done by hlds are done the same way, with 2.4.9 > or 2.4.22. And HLDS is no high-stress program like a database with 100 > nodes and a few 10xgig of data. Why should the hlds do its calculations > 10 times faster with a differnet kernel, just saying 'ho you can now > have some CPU power' and 'here is the memory you wanted'. Normaly the > kernel does almost not need much CPU power but the user programms can > have let's say ~95% of the CPU power. There may be a fault in the HLDS > code, no other dedicated server around like Tribes2, Q3 and so on are > needing that much CPU power from a server. Sometimes I whish I could > have a look for optimizing the HLDS engine or VALVe would make it under > the GPL or any other Licence as HL2 is approching the horizon. Also > Steam is a nice idea and I would like it is a GPL project, many people > can offer there knowledge and talents to it. If Steam would be > open-sorce, nevertheless VALVe could use it as destribution for there > very own products without a hassle, like other open-source online-shops > projects. But I'm dreaming and going to far... > > >With your > > numbers that should mean that you could add 50 16 player 24/7 iceworld > > server. Name them all 24/7 iceworld in the hostname and wait for them to > > fill up. Lets see your server lock up WAY before you ever get to those 800 > > concurrent players. Because with your match you could get all 800 on there > > and still have powere to spare. > > Well nothing to say about this. The numbers speak for themselfes. If > that would be true, HLDS has a bigger problem as anybody ever expected. :) > > cheers > Frank > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
