sourcemod or one of its plugins should be able to fix that without any issue.
Adam Abel wrote: > It is a private server. I personally don't want lots of public users on > for that reason, and because I set it up as a private server for my > group of coworker and friends. Any advice on how to disable sv_cheats > for the clients though? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:52 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: hlds_linux Digest, Vol 12, Issue 90 > > Send hlds_linux mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of hlds_linux digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: net_splitpacket_maxrate (Andreas Grimm) > 2. Re: net_splitpacket_maxrate (Ronny Schedel) > 3. Possible fix for server lags introduced by one of the latest > updates (Ronny Schedel) > 4. Re: net_splitpacket_maxrate (Carl) > 5. Re: server.cfg for l4d to disable sv_cheats for clients > (Kevin J. Anderson) > 6. Re: server.cfg for l4d to disable sv_cheats for clients > (Tom Richardson) > 7. server.cfg questions (Christopher Szabo) > 8. Re: net_splitpacket_maxrate (Saint K.) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:18:49 +0100 > From: "Andreas Grimm" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > To: "'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <002e01c99671$ab6df230$0249d6...@net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Did I understand it correct? > > High net_splitpacket_maxrate: > - High CPU load > - Less lags, cos packets are compressed > > Low net_splitpacket_maxrate: > - Low CPU load > - More lags, cos bytes are sent uncompressed > > :-O > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony > Paloma > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 11:54 AM > To: 'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list' > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > > I didn't notice how much CPU it adds. I imagine under normal gameplay > that > it's minimal. Don't set it to 66, that'd be a terrible idea. The value > is in > bytes/sec and defaults to 15000. You don't want to set it lower. In the > pictures, I was setting it to 300000. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J?K? T > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:50 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > > > Have you noticed how much more cpu this uses up? > > net_splitpacket_maxrate 66 > > Going to test this out right now myself. > > Pictures look good, hope this works out nice. :) > > Thanks Tony. > > > > > >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 02:37:06 -0800 >> Subject: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate >> >> I was experimenting with net_splitpacket_maxrate and it seems it has a >> definite noticeable effect. Assuming your server's CPU can handle the > extra >> load required by splitting an extra amount of large packets and > compressing >> this, I would recommend setting this to the same as your sv_maxrate > (unless >> your maxrate is zero, in which case you should set it to a real high > value). >> Look at these pictures: >> http://www.sourceop.com/randomimages/net_splitpacket_maxrate/ >> >> Because of the constant stream of large amounts of incoming data, > every >> packet in the screenshots is part of a fragmented set. The CVar limits > the >> rate of these packets specifically and defaults to only 15000. This is > a >> problem because when there is large amounts of action, it is common > for >> update packets to be split because of their large size. If most of the >> update packets need to be split, your rate will suddenly be dropped to >> around 15,000. >> >> I see no drawback to increasing the value of this CVar other than the >> increased CPU load your server might get since it will be splitting > and >> compressing more outgoing packets. >> >> Hope this helps, >> Tony >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > _________________________________________________________________ > How fun is this? IMing with Windows Live Messenger just got better. > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/messenger.aspx > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 12:36:13 +0100 > From: "Ronny Schedel" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > To: "Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <fb8f712c9ce4432badb85ac39c969...@notebook> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > The split packet size is set by net_maxroutable (1260 by default). If > you > enable net_showsplits, you can see the splits of big packets in the > console. > A packet bigger than 1260 bytes - header is splitted into different > packets. > I don't see any change when I set net_splitpacket_maxrate to a different > > value. This is more like a cache or something. > > >> I was experimenting with net_splitpacket_maxrate and it seems it has a >> definite noticeable effect. Assuming your server's CPU can handle the >> extra >> load required by splitting an extra amount of large packets and >> compressing >> this, I would recommend setting this to the same as your sv_maxrate >> (unless >> your maxrate is zero, in which case you should set it to a real high >> value). >> Look at these pictures: >> http://www.sourceop.com/randomimages/net_splitpacket_maxrate/ >> >> Because of the constant stream of large amounts of incoming data, > every >> packet in the screenshots is part of a fragmented set. The CVar limits > the >> rate of these packets specifically and defaults to only 15000. This is > a >> problem because when there is large amounts of action, it is common > for >> update packets to be split because of their large size. If most of the >> update packets need to be split, your rate will suddenly be dropped to >> around 15,000. >> >> I see no drawback to increasing the value of this CVar other than the >> increased CPU load your server might get since it will be splitting > and >> compressing more outgoing packets. >> >> Hope this helps, >> Tony >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > >> please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:05:14 +0100 > From: "Ronny Schedel" <[email protected]> > Subject: [hlds_linux] Possible fix for server lags introduced by one > of the latest updates > To: <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <d8c8c0c804aa46f89b1d6ea5f5c0a...@notebook> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Hello, > > concerning to the thread of Tony Paloma about the > net_splitpacket_maxrate, > maybe I have discovered the source of the lag problems. The problem > seems to > be the decompression client side of the split packets. When I enabled > net_showsplits, a lag appears when a split packet was received. > Normally, > you don't receive alot of split packets, but in high action situations, > you > probably receive much more which causes lags. > > The possible solution could be to turn of the compression of split > packets > server side with: > net_compresspackets 0 > > After some oberservations, it seems to be much better now. > > Best regards > > Ronny Schedel > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:18:03 -0500 > From: Carl <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I don't think packet splitting has to do much with compression. This > looks more like application layer MTU. > > Andreas Grimm wrote: >> Did I understand it correct? >> >> High net_splitpacket_maxrate: >> - High CPU load >> - Less lags, cos packets are compressed >> >> Low net_splitpacket_maxrate: >> - Low CPU load >> - More lags, cos bytes are sent uncompressed >> >> :-O >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony > Paloma >> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 11:54 AM >> To: 'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list' >> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate >> >> I didn't notice how much CPU it adds. I imagine under normal gameplay > that >> it's minimal. Don't set it to 66, that'd be a terrible idea. The value > is in >> bytes/sec and defaults to 15000. You don't want to set it lower. In > the >> pictures, I was setting it to 300000. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of J?K? T >> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:50 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate >> >> >> Have you noticed how much more cpu this uses up? >> >> net_splitpacket_maxrate 66 >> >> Going to test this out right now myself. >> >> Pictures look good, hope this works out nice. :) >> >> Thanks Tony. >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> From: [email protected] >>> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >>> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 02:37:06 -0800 >>> Subject: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate >>> >>> I was experimenting with net_splitpacket_maxrate and it seems it has > a >>> definite noticeable effect. Assuming your server's CPU can handle the >>> >> extra >> >>> load required by splitting an extra amount of large packets and >>> >> compressing >> >>> this, I would recommend setting this to the same as your sv_maxrate >>> >> (unless >> >>> your maxrate is zero, in which case you should set it to a real high >>> >> value). >> >>> Look at these pictures: >>> http://www.sourceop.com/randomimages/net_splitpacket_maxrate/ >>> >>> Because of the constant stream of large amounts of incoming data, > every >>> packet in the screenshots is part of a fragmented set. The CVar > limits the >>> rate of these packets specifically and defaults to only 15000. This > is a >>> problem because when there is large amounts of action, it is common > for >>> update packets to be split because of their large size. If most of > the >>> update packets need to be split, your rate will suddenly be dropped > to >>> around 15,000. >>> >>> I see no drawback to increasing the value of this CVar other than the >>> increased CPU load your server might get since it will be splitting > and >>> compressing more outgoing packets. >>> >>> Hope this helps, >>> Tony >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list > archives, >>> >> please visit: >> >>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >>> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> How fun is this? IMing with Windows Live Messenger just got better. >> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/messenger.aspx >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:25:52 -0700 > From: "Kevin J. Anderson" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] server.cfg for l4d to disable sv_cheats for > clients > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > If you are going to modify your server like this, please make sure to > make it private so public players can't join it from the lobby. There > is nothing more annoying than to join a server from the lobby that is > running a ton of plugins and changes. This is not fun. I'm pretty > sure most here will agree. > > Kevin > > YankeeDeuce wrote: >> Install SourceMod (http://www.sourcemod.net/). In your server.cfg add >> sm_cvar before any options that require cheats to be on. >> >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Adam Abel <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hello, I'm new to running a source server, but I've setup my > server.cfg >>> with custom rules based on the cvar available online to change how vs >>> plays. Most of the changes require sv_cheats to be set to 1. > Shortly >>> after running the server I realized that all the clients can activate >>> cheats, spawning tanks, witches, and noclipping. I turned on >>> rcon_password and a password on the server, but it didn't help. Is >>> there any way to lock out the clients without disabling sv_cheats or > am >>> I going to have to wait for the SDK to come out? Thanks. >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 13:39:13 +0000 > From: Tom Richardson <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] server.cfg for l4d to disable sv_cheats for > clients > To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Please do us all a favour and keep your server private so that people > wanting a vanilla game experience don't end up being forced by > matchmaking > to play your idea of how versus should be balanced. > > 2009/2/24 Kevin J. Anderson <[email protected]> > >> If you are going to modify your server like this, please make sure to >> make it private so public players can't join it from the lobby. > There >> is nothing more annoying than to join a server from the lobby that is >> running a ton of plugins and changes. This is not fun. I'm pretty >> sure most here will agree. >> >> Kevin >> >> YankeeDeuce wrote: >>> Install SourceMod (http://www.sourcemod.net/). In your server.cfg > add >>> sm_cvar before any options that require cheats to be on. >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Adam Abel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, I'm new to running a source server, but I've setup my > server.cfg >>>> with custom rules based on the cvar available online to change how > vs >>>> plays. Most of the changes require sv_cheats to be set to 1. > Shortly >>>> after running the server I realized that all the clients can > activate >>>> cheats, spawning tanks, witches, and noclipping. I turned on >>>> rcon_password and a password on the server, but it didn't help. Is >>>> there any way to lock out the clients without disabling sv_cheats > or am >>>> I going to have to wait for the SDK to come out? Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:48:36 +0100 > From: Christopher Szabo <[email protected]> > Subject: [hlds_linux] server.cfg questions > To: "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > "You're running into scheduler latency problems with those settings. > Pingboost 2 on Linux also uses select(), which > uses a jiffies (on older kernels), and isn't really a good thing to > use anyways. > > You're going to have to use sched_rr/sched_fifo instead of > sched_other. (as long as your running a full preemptive kernel)" > > > > That didnt help either.. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hitta b?sta priserna p? MSN Shopping! > http://shopping.msn.se/co_16199-msn-shopping.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:51:40 +0100 > From: "Saint K." <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > To: "'Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hi, > > Thanks a lot for the info. We see a significant drop in choke which is > caused by some updates a while back. Choke levels on full-action > dustbowl 26 > players were around 70%, now dropped to around 20%. CPU load hasn't > changed > a bit. > > Cheers, > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony > Paloma > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 11:37 AM > To: 'Half-Life dedicated Win32 server mailing list'; 'Half-Life > dedicated > Linux server mailing list' > Subject: [hlds_linux] net_splitpacket_maxrate > > I was experimenting with net_splitpacket_maxrate and it seems it has a > definite noticeable effect. Assuming your server's CPU can handle the > extra > load required by splitting an extra amount of large packets and > compressing > this, I would recommend setting this to the same as your sv_maxrate > (unless > your maxrate is zero, in which case you should set it to a real high > value). > Look at these pictures: > http://www.sourceop.com/randomimages/net_splitpacket_maxrate/ > > Because of the constant stream of large amounts of incoming data, every > packet in the screenshots is part of a fragmented set. The CVar limits > the > rate of these packets specifically and defaults to only 15000. This is a > problem because when there is large amounts of action, it is common for > update packets to be split because of their large size. If most of the > update packets need to be split, your rate will suddenly be dropped to > around 15,000. > > I see no drawback to increasing the value of this CVar other than the > increased CPU load your server might get since it will be splitting and > compressing more outgoing packets. > > Hope this helps, > Tony > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1967 - Release Date: > 02/23/09 > 18:22:00 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > End of hlds_linux Digest, Vol 12, Issue 90 > ****************************************** > > > This e-mail and any attachment are confidential and intended solely for the > use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and > any attachment from your system. Unauthorized publication, use, > dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail and its > associated attachments is strictly prohibited. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
