server suggestion

[elois]

*edit, I'm going to rewrite my post here, because I had a missconception,  I will leave the original post below
 I have a couple suggestions/questions.  Now I read that at some point you plan to implement multiple servers when the need arises, and the dev's have stated that it is not yet necessary.  Now I may be ignorant, but server seems to never have an uptime greater than 3 days, and usually never make that 3 day mark anyways.  Having 2 servers would obviously take up the slack if one were to fail.  I realize that the code may not be developed yet to support multiple servers, but a response to this would be nice.  Secondly, assuming that the code for multiple server support is not implemented yet, how about a scheduled reboot of the server daily, at the lowest usage times.  I would be willing to wait 10 min each time i play, in order to have the server running, especially on the weekends when nobody is able to get to the server.  We had the server down for a couple of days a couple weeks ago.  Now again, I may be ignorant, and you may not wish to auto reboot the system every day, in order to stress test the code.  Again a response would put not only my mind at ease, but others that might be wondering as well.  Now I realize that you all are very busy with life, and you have put an enormous amount of time and effort into this game.  You owe us nothing, and we owe you our appreciation, which speaking for myself, you have.  I felt this deserved a new thread, if the mods disagree, I understand.  One last suggestion.  I would recommend a dedicated thread for posting about the servers being down.  This may not be so much for the devs, but for the players, to at least know that a server issue is posted about.  I know this is somewhat frowned upon, since the devs probably check the server status when they can anyways, and before checking the forums.  But like I said, it's more for the players than the devs.
Regards
*edit I opened this thread assuming that we had 1 server handling the player connections, and one server handling the npc, aka 2 machines.  The server map http://www.planeshift.it/psworldmap.php?type=servers shows 2 servers (actually it shows 3, but i had only seen 2 at the time, my bad).  You may wish to skip down a bit, because my discussion assumed this, and since we really only have one machine, the logic apears to be a bit flawed end edit*

Hello,
  I'd like to start off by saying that this is a wonderful game.  I'd like to thank the developers for donating their time and effort so that the rest of us can enjoy this game for free.  I's also like to thank fragnetics for hosting the server.  With all of that said, so you know where I'm coming from...

  I have a couple suggestions/questions.  Now I read that at some point you plan to implement multiple servers when the need arises, and the dev's have stated that it is not yet necessary.  Now I may be ignorant, but both the player server, and the NPC server seem to never have an uptime greater than 3 days, and usually never make that 3 day mark anyways.  Having 2 servers for each would obviously take up the slack if one were to fail.  I realize that the code may not be developed yet to support multiple servers, but a response to this would be nice.  Secondly, assuming that the code for multiple server support is not implemented yet, how about a scheduled reboot of the servers daily, at the lowest usage times.  I would be willing to wait 10 min each time i play, in order to have both servers up and running, especially on the weekends when nobody is able to get to the servers.  We had the servers down for a couple of days a couple weeks ago.  Now again, I may be ignorant, and you may not wish to auto reboot the systems every day, in order to stress test the code.  Again a response would put not only my mind at ease, but others that might be wondering as well.  Now I realize that you all are very busy with life, and you have put an enormous amount of time and effort into this game.  You owe us nothing, and we owe you our appreciation, which speaking for myself, you have.  I felt this deserved a new thread, if the mods disagree, I understand.  One last suggestion.  I would recommend a dedicated thread for posting about the servers being down.  This may not be so much for the devs, but for the players, to at least know that a server issue is posted about.  I know this is somewhat frowned upon, since the devs probably check the server status when they can anyways, and before checking the forums.  But like I said, it's more for the players than the devs.
Regards

[Tuxide]

I disagree with having them on separate boxes because the communication overhead would be greater if the server and superclient were on two separate machines.  Having two processes talk to each other on a socket is a lot faster when they're both on the same box.

[Mythryndel]

You disagree with having two servers, that is fine. I am curious to hear a response to the autostart of the servers once per day. I know that there is currently some form of recovery if a particular piece fails, but this would also allow for any new dev code to be introduced at a specific time of day. Call it a scheduled server maintenance window. It does not necessarily have to be every day, but the idea does have merit.

[Caarrie]

If the server crashes the devs are notified of the crash, but not always do they get told that the server did not come back up. An auto restart will not fix this issue, the Devs have to be told of the issue and the few devs that have access to the server will restart it. For now there is NO code to support many servers and for now there will be only one server and npcclient that run for ps.

[elois]

I disagree with having them on separate boxes because the communication overhead would be greater if the server and superclient were on two separate machines.  Having two processes talk to each other on a socket is a lot faster when they're both on the same box.

I understand your arguement, and here is my counter argument.  You assume that the extra bandwidth will be costly.  It might be, or it might be donated.  Secondly the devs plan to use multiple servers anyways at some point, so they must already have a plan in place to address this issue.  Secondly, who says the servers have to connect to each other through the internet, they can be in the same room and communicate through a LAN.  Many other MMORPS's have multiple servers, so the solution to having multiple servers should be a null argument.

If the server crashes the devs are notified of the crash, but not always do they get told that the server did not come back up. An auto restart will not fix this issue, the Devs have to be told of the issue and the few devs that have access to the server will restart it. For now there is NO code to support many servers and for now there will be only one server and npcclient that run for ps.

Yes, but the longer a server runs, the more likely it is to crash, mainly due to memory leaks.  Bottom line, would auto restarts reduce the # of crashes?  I understand that a server would not be able to auto restart if it crashes, but if the # of crashes can be reduced by auto restarts, wouldn't that be a good thing?  Again I'm assuming that auto restarts would reduce the # of crashes.

[Caarrie]

if the crash is caused by a bug there is no way auto restarting the server will fix the bug and keep the server from crashing. Please read some other threads on the forum

http://hydlaa.com/smf/index.php?topic=28600.msg329037;topicseen#msg329037

there are other posts on this topic. this is a duplicate post and not telling the devs anything new on this issue

[Tuxide]

I think I am having a problem understanding what you are saying.  Are you implying that the server and superclient should be on two separate machines?  Because that is what I am reading, and I think doing that would cause way too much lag.  Also as of now, all of the hardware used to run the server end (server, superclient, etc.) is donated and there are several more lined up to start hosting servers as soon as the current one has reached its capacity.  I could be wrong but I think the plan is to fire up another box as soon as the current one reaches 500 players during peak times.

[Rayken]

He has a point about memory usage.  if memory leaks are a problem that cause crashes or other performance issues, then yes freeing up that memory by restarting the server should fix those issues.  However I doubt if server-side memory leaks are an issue.

I don't understand the 2 server idea either...

[elois]

Well I'm not exactly sure what a server is vs a super client.  My point, is that if more than one server was available, if one were to go down, atleast the other would be running.  Now I also assumed that these servers don't need a single server to coordinate them, but I'm starting to get the drift that maybe they do.  Now I know Caarie stated that implementation of multiple server code is not slated for the near future.  I am new to this forum and project.  So If you are a dev, then that is a fair and suitable answer.  I checked the dev list and couldn't determine if you were a dev.  I see it says "tester" in your profile.  Again, if you are a dev, good answer, if not, a response from a dev would be nice (but obviously you don't have to).  Now I just want to make one thing clear that I think is being misunderstood.  I'm not saying an auto restart implementation will work at all if the server crashes.  What I'm saying is that if the server (aka machine) is set to restart every 24 hours, then perhaps the # of crashes will be reduced.  The Kernel may not even need to be restarted, however developmental code can and does destabilize the OS kernel on other projects, so I'd recommend a complete restart.
@ Caarrie
Yes, I read the FAQ some time ago, and nothing in there really is in argument to what I've posted.  I wasn't saying that a second server is necessary because there are too many people, I'm saying a second server is necessary, since the one server we have goes down all the time.  If you have 2, and one goes down, there other is still trucking along.  Perhaps there is something specific in the FAQ you were referring too?  You mentioned this was a duplicate post.  Are you saying that all the points I brought up are duplicate?  Because I had many different points of discussion in my post.
Regards

[Tuxide]

The superclient is what you've been calling the "NPC server" (which isn't actually a server to begin with).  Another name for it is npcclient, but I've always called it superclient.  It's called that because it's like 300 or so psclients connecting to one machine, handling the NPC AI.

[elois]

The superclient is what you've been calling the "NPC server" (which isn't actually a server to begin with).  Another name for it is npcclient, but I've always called it superclient.  It's called that because it's like 300 or so psclients connecting to one machine, handling the NPC AI.

So the server is the machine, and the super client is the software?  If that is what you are saying, then that is what I assumed a long time ago.  But then you posted that you thought that i was saying having the super client on a different machine other than the server, which confuses the heck out of me.  to me I understand 1 server software on 1 server.  if you have 2 servers, then each server machine has 1 installation of server software, and then they communicate to each other updating player info.  I'm not sure why you thought i was saying that the server software should be anywhere other than on the server.  I still may be not fully understanding what you are saying, if it appears that I'm not, could you please clarify?
Regards

PS
Also, the NPC serer seems to need to be periodically reset.  I have on many occassions been fighting a character and all of a sudden it becomes impervious.   I think the program is getting confused about who is engaged in battle with the NPC, and thus makes it impervious.  I'm not sure what the devs do to fix this (since they have many times), but I assumed a restart.  Maybe they just flush a data cache or something?  If that';s what they do, then maybe a periodic flush at low usage times might be good too?  Again I'm making an assumption ti use as a device to show my line of thinking.
Regards

*edit*

PSS
@tuxide
Just re-read some things here.  Just to make sure we are on the same page, the NPC server, and the Plane shift server (that we connect to) are in different countries.  I was saying that we should have 2 NPC servers (2 machines each w/ NPC software installed), and 2 Plane Shift Servers (2 machines that each have server software installed).  I never understood why we had 2 different servers handling the NPC's and the players, but that is beyond the scope of this discussion anyways.
Regards

[Rayken]

Technically speaking, a server is a program (also called a service or deamon) that runs on a  machine.  Often times the machine is called the server too, but in reality the word refers to the software (Apache for instance, is a web server).  In this case we have 1 machine in Singapore running both the psserver program and the npcclient.  Therefore they are in the same country.

[Tuxide]

The superclient and "psserver" are both software programs that run on the same machine in Singapore.  You can download the source code to both of them yourself and compile them if you're daring.  Or if you want to fix the thing yourself.

[elois]

Technically speaking, a server is a program (also called a service or deamon) that runs on a  machine.  Often times the machine is called the server too, but in reality the word refers to the software (Apache for instance, is a web server).  In this case we have 1 machine in Singapore running both the psserver program and the npcclient.  Therefore they are in the same country.

OK, that clears up one thing I had a misconception on.  The server map really needs to be updated http://www.planeshift.it/psworldmap.php?type=servers  That was really messing me up.  I saw 2 dots (there are actually 3), and assumed 1 was NPC server, and 1 was player server.  I now see that some of my statements are very confusing.  So now I'm saying a second server would be great since the one server we have now goes down all the time.  Where as if we had 2, if one were to go down, the second would keep running.  Now as far as the NPC server, it seems to lock up monsters sometimes during battles,  Maybe a flush of it's data cache (or what ever it might be called), or a periodic auto restart.  Again, I now see how my posts were confusing, we were talking with 2 very different ideas.
Regards

[Karyuu]

FYI: If you hover your mouse over the dots, you'll see their description :]