These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Increasing Server Tick Frequency to 2Hz ... Good, Bad, Ugly?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#1 - 2014-02-06 02:17:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?

*This comes to mind after reading some posts earlier today about the delay between the time commands are issued and implemented*

Thank me later :D
Marie Hartinez
Aries Munitions and Defense
#2 - 2014-02-06 02:19:57 UTC
CCP would need twice the number of hamsters?

Surrender is still your slightly less painful option.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-02-06 02:20:33 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#4 - 2014-02-06 02:21:53 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?

Thank me later :D
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5 - 2014-02-06 02:24:49 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Likely nothing that currently exists.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-02-06 02:27:22 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Network performance isn't the issue. Raw number of calculations per second is. When you double the polling rate the absolute number of calculations increases to the square.

So say you have 400 pilots scapping, and say (totally made up number) that it requires 100,000 calculations a second. This is firing solution, ship vectors, bumping, refits, damage calculations, bonuses going up and down, session calculations, drawing models and what not


100,000 square is 10 billion, its not a linear progression.
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#7 - 2014-02-06 02:27:27 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Likely nothing that currently exists.


You really think so?

Thank me later :D
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#8 - 2014-02-06 02:29:25 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Network performance isn't the issue. Raw number of calculations per second is. When you double the polling rate the absolute number of calculations increases to the square.

So say you have 400 pilots scapping, and say (totally made up number) that it requires 100,000 calculations a second. This is firing solution, ship vectors, bumping, refits, damage calculations, bonuses going up and down, session calculations, drawing models and what not


100,000 square is 10 billion, its not a linear progression.


So more processing power and memory? I am genuinely ignorant of how CCP runs all this craziness ... not a troll thread, promise :D

Thank me later :D
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-02-06 02:35:20 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Network performance isn't the issue. Raw number of calculations per second is. When you double the polling rate the absolute number of calculations increases to the square.

So say you have 400 pilots scapping, and say (totally made up number) that it requires 100,000 calculations a second. This is firing solution, ship vectors, bumping, refits, damage calculations, bonuses going up and down, session calculations, drawing models and what not


100,000 square is 10 billion, its not a linear progression.


So more processing power and memory? I am genuinely ignorant of how CCP runs all this craziness ... not a troll thread, promise :D


Google articles for Sandia Labratory's Red Storm super computer. CCP has next generation hardware....some of the best enterprise level servers on the market....but otherwise the Tranquility cluster is very much a direct descendant of Red Storm.
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley
New Eden Tech Support
#10 - 2014-02-06 02:39:41 UTC
thanks for the Red Storm reference... that's quite a machine

Thank me later :D
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-02-06 02:41:22 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
thanks for the Red Storm reference... that's quite a machine


If you can fine the youtubes from the last couple fanfests CCP Veritas's presentations cover a lot of the hardware, network and middleware layers that are the physical side of the cluster.

Since I'm in the field anyway, I pay VERY close attention to them usually.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#12 - 2014-02-06 02:53:42 UTC
Another thing to understand is that EVE's base code is 10 years old... made when the most powerful CPUs were largely single cores. CCP bet on single core processing power to continually increase and wrote the code with that thought in mind.

As a consequence, most of EVE's architecture cannot multi-thread and so cannot take advantage of multiple core CPUs. The DEVs have been trying to rectify this for a few years now... breaking down parts of the system so that they can be processed parallel to each other (see: "Brain in a Box")... but it's slow work.

How did you Veterans start?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-02-06 03:09:22 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
Another thing to understand is that EVE's base code is 10 years old... made when the most powerful CPUs were largely single cores. CCP bet on single core processing power to continually increase and wrote the code with that thought in mind.

As a consequence, most of EVE's architecture cannot multi-thread and so cannot take advantage of multiple core CPUs. The DEVs have been trying to rectify this for a few years now... breaking down parts of the system so that they can be processed parallel to each other (see: "Brain in a Box")... but it's slow work.



Porting from Python to something that can do multi-core work a la Red Hawk would basically be Eve 2.....they would be starting from the ground up with a completely different environment.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#14 - 2014-02-06 04:47:56 UTC
CCP has said this is impossible.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Rich Uncle PennyBags
EVE Online Monopoly
#15 - 2014-02-06 05:09:29 UTC
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Jamwara DelCalicoe Ashley wrote:
What is the barrier to increasing server response time to every half second instead of every one second?


Nullsec.

The servers already struggle over 1000 pilots with a 1Hz tick, exponentially increasing client polling simply won't help


That's a product of design. What network infrastructure would be needed to make it work?


Network performance isn't the issue. Raw number of calculations per second is. When you double the polling rate the absolute number of calculations increases to the square.

So say you have 400 pilots scapping, and say (totally made up number) that it requires 100,000 calculations a second. This is firing solution, ship vectors, bumping, refits, damage calculations, bonuses going up and down, session calculations, drawing models and what not


100,000 square is 10 billion, its not a linear progression.


So more processing power and memory? I am genuinely ignorant of how CCP runs all this craziness ... not a troll thread, promise :D



I don't think there's been any recent update on server specs... But they're pretty standard server farm stuff.
Quite a large one though.
I'm recalling a number of around 3500GHz total processing power.

The server they use for reinforcing large fights was talked about at ff a little while ago.
It's a military/stock market machine. Cooling requirements include a dedicated air conditioning unit.
Rich Uncle PennyBags
EVE Online Monopoly
#16 - 2014-02-06 05:10:35 UTC
I don't think there's been any recent update on server specs... But they're pretty standard server farm stuff.
Quite a large one though.
I'm recalling a number of around 3500GHz total processing power.

The server they use for reinforcing large fights was talked about at ff a little while ago.
It's a military/stock market machine. Cooling requirements include a dedicated air conditioning unit.[/quote]

So, if that has trouble running current fights... Imagine what would be needed to double it.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2014-02-06 06:34:46 UTC
Rich Uncle PennyBags wrote:


So, if that has trouble running current fights... Imagine what would be needed to double it.



A true multi-threaded environment....which they can't do without re-writing the engine, like I said Eve 2. Basically what happened was that when these design descisions were being made Intel was forecasting 9GHz processors inside 10 years. Well, current manufacturing processes hit a wall about 4 years ago in the 4.2-4.4 range. The forcast was off by a significant margin.

The way this was mitigated on the hardware end was by multi-threading, which is great, when you aren't running a game up 10 year old code that was written to be strickly single core. The idea of load shedding to 8 cores at a time wasn't even on the radar for 8-9 years after eve's engine was developed.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-02-06 06:39:28 UTC
2 Hz would be fine under most conditions. If server load increases then it could go back to 1 Hz and then tidi would kick in at the normal point.

It's not like it would have to be 2 Hz all the time.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2014-02-06 06:44:16 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
2 Hz would be fine under most conditions. If server load increases then it could go back to 1 Hz and then tidi would kick in at the normal point.

It's not like it would have to be 2 Hz all the time.


Dynamic polling rates?

I've had to help debug the code for phased array radars that have to deal with that sort of thing. Basically replace client polling rate with radar dwell search patterns.

Suffice it to say its not that digital in nature a LOT of logic has to be delt with, which causes the same issue, as calculation numbers increase so does processor load. What happens is that you end up with breakpoints where the logic to decide the rate takes up more processing resources than just staying at the lower rate.

Depending on the design margins, this can be a fairly wide range.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2014-02-06 06:45:41 UTC
Pretty sure the game has to do this anyway due to tidi.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
123Next pageLast page