These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

locked out at under 1900 pop?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Koby Botick
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-04-27 21:22:19 UTC
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
If Jita, which is on it's own node/server gets locked down at 1900 people, what does that say about the rest of the servers?


It's less about the hardware and far more about using a scripting language for heavy lifting stuff. It may have been a great choice back in the day but nowadays the fact it still has a single global lock for certain things is seriously eating a huge amount of performance right out by killing concurrency gains (and frequency of CPUs does not go up significantly, but concurrency/core count does).

So they have to run many seperate processess in parallel to be able to use up the hardware and while this gives concurrency gains, it's an increased cost in communication between those processes again.
THE L0CK
Denying You Access
#82 - 2012-04-27 21:24:54 UTC
TRUE ZER0 wrote:
In before lock



Too late, I already beat you beeeoootch!

Do you smell what the Lock's cooking?
non judgement
Without Fear
Flying Burning Ships Alliance
#83 - 2012-04-27 21:32:41 UTC  |  Edited by: non judgement
Has anyone said anything about how when goons started killing things in Jita. Population was about 2100 and TiDi was at 20%.
Edit: I don't see it as a problem. Did any one think before hand that the goons doing a "burn Jita" would have 3000 people in Jita?
adam smash
Department of Gub'nent Welfare
Harkonnen Federation
#84 - 2012-04-27 22:06:21 UTC
CCP can say they have the data all they want...

The bugs
Server reboots
Server deaths
Fails


They all kinda show us no matter what CCP has they still have no idea what is going on.

Ya you have crime watch and concord and all other kinds of things running in HS vs null... ya some of these people can't understand that.


Your lag feature... is not even on right now... so either A it does not work in HS or B your BSing us what one is it?

Unlike others I understand it is likely not THAT clear cut but it has to fall into one or the other.
Thomas Kreshant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2012-04-27 22:10:58 UTC
Don't like it feel free to go find yourself another game.
Josef Djugashvilis
#86 - 2012-04-27 22:15:25 UTC
Xenuria wrote:
The point I am trying to make is that if ANY system ANYWHERE in EVE prevents users from jumping in because of how many people are in there already or how much stuff is going on then the game is no longer single shard.

It becomes single shard under specific circumstances instead of being single shard under ever circumstance.

This is a caveat.

EVE ONLINE

SINGLE SHARD WORLD.....


Except when Jita is getting swarmed... CCP~


And you wanted to be on the CSM....dear god almighty...

This is not a signature.
Mara Villoso
Long Jump.
#87 - 2012-04-27 22:31:54 UTC
THE L0CK wrote:
TRUE ZER0 wrote:
In before lock



Too late, I already beat you beeeoootch!

Its good to see you occasionally get some use out of your meme.
Masterofone
#88 - 2012-04-27 23:44:09 UTC
OK, i don't know why i picked this topic to pop this characters forum cherry in but here goes.......

Jita server:
0 Belts
33 Moons
8 Planets
7 Gates
14 Stations
14 Stations of peoples stuff to track
Major market hub
xxx,xxx transactions to serve and track
xxx,xxx contracts to serve and track
xxx,xxx,xxx chat spambots that need to be jettisoned
xxx,xxx,xxx market and contract searches to serve
Concord systems
The whole host of HiSec Security rules to track and monitor every pilot and ship (can't have caps jumping in, can't use bombs, that character has too low standings to be here send concord after him, concord can pop your ship but not your pod, and on and on and on................)


NullSec Space (a system picked at random)
7 Belts
48 Moons
6 Planets
Maybe 3 gates
1 Outpost
Minimal population storage
Minimal Market activity
The sounds of space crickets (ok, belt rats)

Now add 2500 people in various ships, 2500 skill sets, tens of thousands of modules and ship variables, thousands of drones, tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition flying about, wrecks, extra comm traffic, people warping all about, concord not knowing which call to answer first.

If it had been any other system in the game, probably even a lot of hisec systems, they could conceivably raised it as high as 5,000 pilots in system with the "Hamster Colony 4000 Server" (patent pending).

Blame the choice of location, the physical limits of technology or your entitlement complex, imagine how pissed you would be if they did let you jump into jita and the session change took 5 minutes and you couldn't move when you did appear on the other end. I personally feel sorry for the people that are trying to keep the Jita server from going up in a poof of smoke. And no it probably doesn't help that some of the underlying code is so old it's was written using hieroglyphics (thinking of market, corp interface, pos interface for a few). How much of the system can they update without having to gut it and start over, how much spaghetti can you have in one program and expect it to work? Just think of the tears when you have to download the whole client again, and the game (yes it's really a game) is offline for several days due to a major code replacement, database overhaul, translation and migration, aka whole system rework.

For the people that think population limits means not a sandbox...... Really, you want to stick the entire population of eve on one node? You were never in one of the big fleet fights in days of old were you? Your ship gets poped but no one knew it for like five minutes because of lag? Or the way people used local and missiles to slow down nodes? This isn't a playstation game, the level of complexity far outweighs that of most mmo's even, and the fact that they have been around as long as they have without completely caving in to the 'it's too hard' crowd or going to pay to win like so many other is a huge credit to them.

I'm on no ones side - everyone’s interpretation of fair is just that, theirs, and it will be different than mine.

Fly fast and shoot straight, find peace when you need it, war when you want it, love always and turn up the music.
supr3m3justic3
Perkone
Caldari State
#89 - 2012-04-27 23:51:56 UTC
Isnt this a rant? Why isnt this topic closed?
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#90 - 2012-04-27 23:57:47 UTC
Masterofone wrote:
Alot of good stuff



CCP showed post TiDi battle server load for the 2k peeps, and they said it wasn't even sweating after that. So your estimates of 4/5k battles out in null are more than possible they showed. Also right on jita. It has to run it's own dedicated node for regular traffic, let alone this.


Now to the haters.

Traffic cap being not eve? What would you want to do about it. Lets go back to 700 jita peeps being amazing when I started, and the load so bad I would have to restart the client just to clear the cache. If you went jita, you shut off graphics, no arguements and tons of other things just to be able to operate. Traffic control seems perfectly reasonable. Cannot bypass hardware.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
IIS PRIMARY
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-04-28 00:18:25 UTC
I get nothing but a black screen when undocking from 4/4 now, and have to relog to fix it. This issue just started in the last 30 minutes and was not present at all yesterday.

So it would seem that all is not well with the server at the moment.
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Doomheim
#92 - 2012-04-28 00:38:39 UTC
Koby Botick wrote:
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
If Jita, which is on it's own node/server gets locked down at 1900 people, what does that say about the rest of the servers?


It's less about the hardware and far more about using a scripting language for heavy lifting stuff. It may have been a great choice back in the day but nowadays the fact it still has a single global lock for certain things is seriously eating a huge amount of performance right out by killing concurrency gains (and frequency of CPUs does not go up significantly, but concurrency/core count does).

So they have to run many seperate processess in parallel to be able to use up the hardware and while this gives concurrency gains, it's an increased cost in communication between those processes again.


I think its CCPs way to minimize the damage you guys do to the stupid ppl willing to run stuff through Jita

Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game
Sigurd Sig Hansen
Doomheim
#93 - 2012-04-28 00:58:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigurd Sig Hansen
supr3m3justic3 wrote:
Isnt this a rant? Why isnt this topic closed?


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=101626&find=unread

same question. 19 post OP rant in fact

Mining is the "Deadliest Catch" in this game
Seamus MacMartin
VNM Biological Survey Corps
#94 - 2012-04-28 02:55:21 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Midge Mo'yb wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Midge Mo'yb wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
We raise and lower the cap based on technological factors - if the system is getting hammered repeatedly, sometimes it has to be lowered to ensure performance. Simple as that.



isnt that what tidi is for... gracreful degradation of the service

i dont see our fleet fights in 0.0 being locked at 1850

lame excuse


You just aren't considering all of the angles. TiDi helps, but consider that the pop cap was 1028 when it was first introduced in 2008, was 1500 during the Jita riots of last year, and has now risen considerably (and is constantly being altered as things spike or smooth out). Jita, and high sec systems in general, are far more complex in terms of load than nullsec systems.


the limits were introduced when the servers didnt degrade gracefully, i fail to see how this is any different to massive fight of nullsec - when we have to just deall with it when we hit the limits

the server seems quite content at the limit, that imo says that the limit is too low.


Due respect, but you don't have any information at hand except anecdotal, and I have the server technical information open on a page in front of me, as do people far more well versed in these matters who actually control the cap, so while you are entitled to your opinion, in this case it is inapplicable.


CCP, definitely better to not feed the trolls, especially when they seem to lack understanding of the technology involved. Blink

"Rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength." - Eric Hoffer

"A warrior may choose pacifism. Others are condemned to it." - Unknown
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#95 - 2012-04-28 03:35:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Morganta
supr3m3justic3 wrote:
Isnt this a rant?


how you figure?

pointing out an adjustment to pop caps when higher pop and more action resulted in tdi doing its thing without the need for pop caps is hardly a rant.

more pointing out the failure of tdi (and gcc apparently)

it would seem that tdi is simply a bandage for a bit of server strain and not the blobfest cure-all it was vaunted as seeing as though SOP today has been to prevent tdi from kicking in at over 50%

pointing that out is fully in line with GD rules and it has nothing to do with jita access per-se.
you might consider actually reading the thread before adding your feeble 2 pesos