Hi, Thanks for the reply.
The servers are build according to Tyans best practise, so everything is inserted in the correct slots. I've recently also updated the BIOS versions to be sure. One thing I notice, at the memory settings is a "snooping" option - If this is disabled, the overall load is slightly lower (as it is now). I'd generally wouldn't blame the hardware either, however, seeing I can't find anything software wise, it's the logical next thing to look at. Any more tips are welcome! Saint K. ________________________________________ From: Jesse Molina [[email protected]] Sent: 25 July 2011 12:36 To: Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list Cc: Saint K. Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 Looks fine, don't mess with it. generic-receive-offload would be good if you were doing 10G networking, but otherwise forget about it. Make sure that your RAM is in the right slots as recommended by Tyan. That can slow things down sometimes but I would not expect that to cause such significant problems. I have no clue. Grab an old cruddy desktop, set it up on your home network, do a quickplay qualified server, and then watch how it runs. Use the same OS and versions you are using on your server and then start twiddling. You only need about a 2Mbps upstream rate for a 24-player server. I would blame software way before I started blaming hardware. Actually, I'd blame something you did unknowingly, first, but just because I'm a BOFH. People like to throw switches in the desperate hope that one of them was put there by system developers specifically just to slow things down, like a turbo switch on an old 486DX. "Surely, my sheer desire to make things go faster and by randomly throwing every bios setting, recompiling my kernel with obscure realtime patches I found, enabling weird sysctrl parameters, and buying a Bigfoot gaming NIC will make things go faster!" And that's why we have fps_max 1000 and 100PPS update/cmd rates on servers. I really have no idea what I'm talking about. I've only been messing with srcds servers for the last nine months or so. Then again... Seagate did ship me all of those SATA 300 drives with the 150-limiting jumpers on by default. Saint K. wrote: > Hi, > > I am getting these values returned, not entirely sure what I am looking at; > > mrblonde:~# ethtool -k eth0 > Offload parameters for eth0: > rx-checksumming: on > tx-checksumming: on > scatter-gather: on > tcp-segmentation-offload: off > udp-fragmentation-offload: off > generic-segmentation-offload: on > generic-receive-offload: off > large-receive-offload: off > ntuple-filters: off > receive-hashing: off > > > Does this appear to be good? I've checked the chipset specs and it supports > checksum offloading. > > Saint K. > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] > [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Armitage > [[email protected]] > Sent: 25 July 2011 10:36 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 > > I wouldn't expect problems with. But I happily admit to being no expert. > > Try ethtool -k<interface> and see what's what? > > A > > On 25/07/2011 08:42, Saint K. wrote: >> The servers are build on Tyan Tempest i5400 motherboards, based on >> the Intel 5400B chipset platform, the Gbit nic's used on this board >> are Intel 82563EB chips. >> >> I've never really figured the load could be related to the networking >> chip as our throughput tests never really show any issues when tested >> (with all sorts of packet sizes, tcp/udp) >> >> Saint K. ________________________________________ From: >> [email protected] >> [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew >> Armitage [[email protected]] Sent: 25 July 2011 09:36 To: >> [email protected] Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 >> 920 >> >> Maybe the issue is the network hardware? HLDS is very network >> intensive. >> >> I believe that some cards support checksum offloading and some >> don't. >> >> A >> >> On 25/07/2011 07:28, Saint K. wrote: >>> What I am still not getting is that our Xeon E5420's are doing >>> like 70-80% load on a single core for 24 players, and our Xeon >>> E5410's 90%+, where you say your older 4600+ does 70%. >>> >>> Tried all sorts of different kernels out there. >>> >>> Is there perhaps certain BIOS settings which could benefit when >>> running gameservers on them? >>> >>> Ours surely should perform much better then that? >>> >>> Saint K. ________________________________________ From: >>> [email protected] >>> [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jesse >>> Molina [[email protected]] Sent: 25 July 2011 05:15 To: >>> Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list Subject: Re: >>> [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 >>> >>> I have a AMD Phenom x6 1055T doing multiple servers at the same >>> time. TF2 causes the active core to go to 100% for about two >>> seconds during map changes, but otherwise I've never seen it go >>> that high for extended periods of time. Average during full >>> 24-player usage is about 40%. >>> >>> I also have an older AMD Athlon64 x2 4600+ that runs a single >>> 24-player TF2 quickplay server. It averages 70% usage when full >>> and gameplay is great. >>> >>> Both of these are desktop class boards with DDR2 PC800M RAM. >>> Linux 2.6.39. >>> >>> Try watching your CPU usage at (relatively) high resolution with >>> something like "htop -d 1" >>> >>> No clue why you are maxing out like that. >>> >>> >>> >>> Eric Riemers wrote: >>>> All, >>>> >>>> I run a 32 slots server on a i7 920 @ 2.67ghz, but i can see >>>> with top and such that its potentially maxing out at 100% at >>>> times since it only uses one core. Is it really now doing so much >>>> cpu that even a i7 core isn't enough? Didn't have much complaints >>>> before the pew pew. >>>> >>>> 24 slots on the same server do around 60% when full. >>>> >>>> Eric >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, >>>> edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please >>>> visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >>> >>> -- # Jesse Molina # Mail = [email protected] # Page = >>> [email protected] # Cell = 1.602.323.7608 # Web = >>> http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/ >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 -- # Jesse Molina # Mail = [email protected] # Page = [email protected] # Cell = 1.602.323.7608 # Web = http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/ _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
