Dedicated Server non/GUI

[Panzertard]

Copy & Paste; no, unfortunately not. Such a complex sim is built on 1000 of files, with thousands / million lines of code. See for yourself in your install directory.

Much of the heritage of this series comes from the older FC / Lomac series.

So through evolition it must be - or build it from scratch.

 

Anyway, I can't say what ED is thinking or planning, thats ED's choice & strategy - but we can certainly try to influence them by asking them to please build a GUI less server, with a command interface.

 

Meanwhile - I hope you have had a look at ServMan? :)

[HiJack]

VNC is also available on Android! Server check form the bed :P Teamviewer is also available but I liked the VNC client more. This can of course change with new versions.

 

 

(HJ)

[armaholicbr]

GUI or no GUI, what we need is a real dedicated server application!

 

Something that doesn't require a 512mb VGA on the server(that would be so good for MP!), and I'm sure it would improve performance on the server side, allowing more players or even more complex missions with the same resources?

[Stealthbird97]

GUI or no GUI, what we need is a real dedicated server application!

 

Something that doesn't require a 512mb VGA on the server(that would be so good for MP!), and I'm sure it would improve performance on the server side, allowing more players or even more complex missions with the same resources?

 

YES!!! Exactly

[Moa]

And VNC is not "linux based", but rather an application ported to linux.

 

Technically not built for Windows and ported to Linux. Started out for all platforms (the motivation is so the users could access their Unix servers from their desktops, which were Windows and Linux I think). Please see the original VNC site:

http://www.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/vnc_docs/index.html

 

 

Anyway, having graphics interface on server is very very bad idea. Windows or X-window, they are both crappy sources of instability, security leaks and other problems...

 

Wrong. Windows stability has got better - you get uptimes of days or weeks under heavy loads.. Linux is very stable, if you don't have new bling on, you get uptimes of months to years under heavy loads - and yes, I have done this. Mac is pretty stable too (since it is a BSD Unix derivative). Solaris (or Unix) has uptimes of years: I once had a Sparc V machine running Solaris with an uptime of 5 years, and only got rebooted when a memory chip failed.

 

This is why the bigger institutions (banks, government, defence, large internet sites) run Unix/Linux on their servers, although it is invisible to most ordinary users. The 'desktop space' is certainly Windows dominated (we'll ignore the up-and-coming mobiles/iPads/Android(Java on Linux!) tablets that actually are outgrowing desktops), but servers are a mix - which is why people are asking for the ability to run a Linux-based game server. Please note: plenty of other game servers provide Linux server software, and this is usually preferred by admins for stability and performance reasons: eg Counterstrike etc.

Edited April 9, 2012 by Moa

[Rhinox]

Technically not built for Windows and ported to Linux

That is clear to me. I did not say it was ported to linux from windows. I think it was originally developed for some "big" unix...

 

Wrong. Windows stability has got better - you get uptimes of days or weeks under heavy loads.. Linux is very stable, if you don't have new bling on, you get uptimes of months to years under heavy loads - and yes, I have done this.

Stability of windows under load is very poor. I'm running some analyses on my works' desktop and after each one I have to reboot, because system does not simply "recover" and responsiveness is bad even when load has been removed. Moreover graphics interface is the component which causes instability frequently. My desktop is running Win7 and when it crashed, it was always because of bug in gfx-drivers. Similar for linux: kernel itself is very stable, but it is very easy to crash X.

 

So if ED is going to make dedicated server, then:

1. only command-line (no gui at all, only web front-end if necessary)

2. if possible, for linux (or able/allowed to run in windows virtual-server)

[Panzertard]

Stability of windows under load is very poor.

1. Myth - 2. it's somewhat pointless in this debate anyway.

Linux vs Windows debates - please find another forum for that.

 

Stability (which matters) for the kind of services we're talking about here; Servers for the gaming community is more than stable enough on any plattform available today.

DSC is not such a system which requires high availability & redundancy.

ED currently developing for the Windows platform. Who knows if it'll change in the future, but I doubt it.

 

Getting a GUI-less server core is good. A server which isn't affected by any whim ATI/Nvidia may come up with, nor system resources in use due to a graphics system which isn't in use on the server anyway.

But you've noticed the news letter regarding the new core based system I hope. This is a step in the right direction.

 

Bottom line - stay away from the Linux vs Windows, you're able to have a constructive debate without bringing in the 'random myths' out there.

Thanks.

[Rhinox]

1. Myth - 2. it's somewhat pointless in this debate anyway. Linux vs Windows debates - please find another forum for that.

1. That is your opinion. After working for ~20 years as win/lin-admin mine is a little bit different...

2. Moa started this "win vs lin" flame, not me. I just reacted to his claims.

 

Actually if you scroll a little back you find my opinion that windows and linux are about equally (un)stable, if gfx-interface is included. The only difference is in linux you can get rid of X completely and very easily. In Windows this is nearly impossible (iirc there is some windows version without gfx-interface, but that was specially prepared)...

[Panzertard]

My bad, I didn't read up on what Moa responded to your initial post.

 

Anyway - in general, no gui for a server process is better.

 

As of with the DCS;

There's been no pressing issues with the current version of DCS/FC which require such drastic measures.

 

However, I (still) do agree with you - it's better to have a server core / multiplatform / comptability / scaleability / redundancy - if it's adding any real value.

If it's a direct cost with little or no return - then I guess it would be natural to priritize other features which bring more value, customers & revenue.

 

If I were in of a product in a similar situation, I would ask myself;

Does moving the core to another platform bring any real value?

- Does it solve some very core / otherwise big issues? Is it really required?

- Will MYSERVER-product go from 'unstable' to 'stable'?

- Whats the cost vs potenial increased customer base & revenue?

- Will we gain ground vs other competitors?

- How much should we change to bring 'enough' positive effects, with minimum effort, both now at short term as well as long term?

 

Would you disagree to this aproach? :)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

If it's a direct cost with little or no return - then I guess it would be natural to priritize other features which bring more value, customers & revenue.

Can you clarify this position? Are you saying that dedicated server application is a direct cost (of development) with no return?

[Panzertard]

Can you clarify this position? Are you saying that dedicated server application is a direct cost (of development) with no return?

No, not directly. I'm not from ED - so I cannot speak for them.

Keep in mind - I represent only my own opinion, not ED.

 

But I can speak from having (and still are) working with customers with similar (software) requirements.

 

With dedicated servers - you need an audience and a customer base - just as with any other programs & apps.

So if I already had a server app - and someone said that 'this is not working', I would ask, 'what isnt working? How can I solve it?'. 'Do we really have to recode it for a new platform?'

 

However, moving from 1 platform (Win32) to Linux or other kernels - you realize that requires a bit of work, right?

How much is that cost? Who will pay for it?

 

As you noticed in the Newsletter, there are changes coming.

I'm as curious as you wether we get a dedi server soon.

[GGTharos]

He's just presenting a way of analysis (I think).

 

In any case, ED is definitely interested in dedicated server capability, but it may not exactly be at the same priority on their list as it is on yours, that's all. There's just a lot of stuff to do. As you noticed, they announced moving to a core-based system which had been the plan from the very beginning of DCS. It didn't get done straight away for a bunch of reasons, but as you can see, it's coming now.

 

Same deal with other features - but because times change, ED will not confirm what they are working on until they are ready to release a feature.

 

Can you clarify this position? Are you saying that dedicated server application is a direct cost (of development) with no return?

[Moa]

2. Moa started this "win vs lin" flame, not me. I just reacted to his claims.

 

Incorrect. Please read my post. I gave approximate uptimes I have seen for various systems. I did not explicitly say Windows or Linux was better. I let you judge that yourself from the uptimes I have observed. In fact, compared to your post Rhinox I defended Windows, the 64-bit versions have sufficient uptime for the current DCS series.

 

That is clear to me. I did not say it was ported to linux from windows. I think it was originally developed for some "big" unix...

 

Please allow me to also quote what you said earlier:

And VNC is not "linux based", but rather an application ported to linux.

 

My point was this statement was not correct, VNC was pretty-much developed to be cross-platform. I am a proponent of cross-platform, which is why I suggested VNC, why I posted uptime observations showing all are pretty much good enough for use (although Rhinox you posted anti-Windows statements - thinking the GUI is broken when it is not, perhaps you use poorly written software?).

 

So, please don't project any sensitivities about win-lin debate on to me (yes, you blamed me for attempting to start a win-lin flamewar, which if you re-read my posts you will see is not the case).

 

There are many reasons why a portable game server is desirable. One of them is financial. Here is a case study from the X-Plane developer where he personally made $3.5 million US from porting X-Plane to the iPad with one month's work:

http://techhaze.com/2010/03/interview-with-x-plane-creator-austin-meyer/

 

My advocacy is, in fact, for "portability". Let the user choose where they want to run the code. Some folks wanna use Linux, plenty want to use Windows. Some will want to use Mac. Aim for portability (it's not that hard!) and the users will choose what suits *them*.

 

I hope this clarifies sufficiently to stop raising the spectre of the win-lin flamewar nonsense, and also stop accusing me of making statements I did not (how about actually reading my posts without injecting your own sensitivities!).

Edited April 10, 2012 by Moa

[sobek]

My advocacy is, in fact, for "portability". Let the user choose where they want to run the code. Some folks wanna use Linux, plenty want to use Windows. Some will want to use Mac. Aim for portability (it's not that hard!) and the users will choose what suits *them*.

 

Don't you think that portability is always bought at the expense of performance on single platforms?

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

With dedicated servers - you need an audience and a customer base - just as with any other programs & apps.

DCS as well as FC series are study sims. Lack of dynamic campaign makes playable life of DCS and FC very short. On line flying is the only alternative to stay with the game for somewhat longer time.

 

Extremely expensive and difficult to manage on-line playing with DCS and FC further shortens the life of this two beautiful simulators. Let alone the fact that on-line players are your best, 24 hours a day, promoters of your product.

[c0ff]

There are many reasons why a portable game server is desirable. One of them is financial. Here is a case study from the X-Plane developer where he personally made $3.5 million US from porting X-Plane to the iPad with one month's work:

http://techhaze.com/2010/03/interview-with-x-plane-creator-austin-meyer/

 

Btw, from that interview: "Amongst desktop, maybe half and half Mac and Windows, with totally negligible Linux… like less than 2%".

[Moa]

Don't you think that portability is always bought at the expense of performance on single platforms?

 

Short answer is "No".

 

Long answer is that decreased performance has has not been my experience with the all portable programs I have written. Linux/Windows/Solaris have been my main C or C++ targets in the past

 

These days I use Java so extend to Mac too - and the performance gains I get have been using better libraries and algorithms, not micro-optimizations. For example, I'm currently writing my own flight sim and using Vertex Buffer Objects rather than Display Lists (both available in JoGL) is still portable but far outweigh any small C++ optimizations I could have done. Meaning, the algorithms and GPU features available are more important than micro-optimizations (using a little assembler).

 

Similarly, multi-threading in Java is so much easier than C++ that using all the cores on the machine far outweighs any inline-assembly I could have done with C++ (although I can and have used the Java Native Interface and JNA technologies to use native code where I needed to - eg. hardware integration).

 

Finally, I find that not only is portable code (that is, Java) much more productive that C++ (not only due to the language, also due to the huge number of great tools and libraries) I also find that in the case of Java the performance is now better than C++ in many cases where iteration is used (the Sun engineers made the Hotspot just-in-time compiler very, very good). With Java you do have to be careful about what you do to retain good performance - but free tools like JVisualVM (now built in to the JDK) and FindBugs make this pretty easy.

 

With regard to Java gaming there are a few precedents: IL-2 Sturmovik was a mixture of Java, with some performance critical sections in C++ (that was an old engine, I don't think you'd need that native code now, but it is always an option). Minecraft runs pretty well and that is Java. Then I noticed that Bohemia Interactive's Take On Helicopters is getting a Java API and it looks like Armed Assault III will get the same API. From this I deduce that the code itself is either Java or a mix of Java and C++ (I'm speculating here, but I don't think it is an unreasonable guess). I think that the limitation in most multi-threaded games these days is usually the GPU performance not CPU.

 

C++ can be made portable, but from my previous experience I found it much much harder than writing in Java. For multi-threaded networked apps (eg a game server) it is not that hard to write portable code (in either C++ or Java).

 

I hope that answers your question.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Moa

[sobek]

Well, i just asked because a few applications i know to be written in java have piss poor performance, but then that might also be because they were written by unexpierienced folks. I can't judge it myself because i don't know java at all.

[Moa]

Well, i just asked because a few applications i know to be written in java have piss poor performance, but then that might also be because they were written by unexpierienced folks. I can't judge it myself because i don't know java at all.

 

Yes, your observations match relatively common experience.

 

One of the greatest strengths of Java is the fact that it is deliberately kept simple. This allows inexperienced developers to construct working software (which is why very many universities offer their first computer science course in Java).

 

This strength is also a weakness. These same people produce software that usually is not very robust or with good performance - but this is mitigated a little as it is still better than if they couldn't produce anything at all. With more time developing they can learn to achieve both. Unfortunately the Java software produced by these people is taken by users as being an indictment on Java itself, when in fact if you know what you are doing Java can be extremely quick. As a simple example, use of Maps for lookups can save you a huge amount of time instead of iterating through arrays. Using StringBuffer for iterative concatenation is around 100x faster than naiive use of String. Over time you learn lots of little things like this that make you code very much faster than an elementary implementation.

 

For me it is not the Java language that matters, it is the portability. I'm fond of C#.NET (which, it turns out, is pretty much an extension of Java) but the lack of portability means it is a non-starter for my purposes (and the open-source Mono project implements the C# language in a portable way but not the most important part, which is the *libraries*).

 

Anyway, I hope when ED finally work their way down the list to a dedicated game server they write it in portable code so we can run it on any spare machines (and virtual machines) we have lying around (or hire).

[Panzertard]

Anyway, I hope when ED finally work their way down the list to a dedicated game server they write it in portable code so we can run it on any spare machines (and virtual machines) we have lying around (or hire).

You're so much better at explaining things Moa, all of the porting from one core to another. My English lacks to much so I should shut up ;)

 

IMHO, we're slowly getting there with the core based system, new code optimizations etc etc. This is a good step in the direction so it's easier to build such things as a Dedi-server.

[Moa]

You're so much better at explaining things Moa, all of the porting from one core to another. My English lacks to much so I should shut up ;)

Thank you Panzertard. I'd just like to say that your English is vastly better than my Norwegian (although my txts after a lot of beer on a Saturday night do resemble norwegian) :)

 

IMHO, we're slowly getting there with the core based system, new code optimizations etc etc. This is a good step in the direction so it's easier to build such things as a Dedi-server.

 

I think these are great moves by ED. I know that it has been planned and on the drawing board for a while, but it is nice to get news that it is actually happening. With Core coming and the new terrain engine in the works its gonna be a new sim (and hopefully more maintainable as new DCS products arrive).

 

It is also great news that the community will be able to help testing (even though the bug reports must make the team tear their hair out). If the stability can get nailed for multi-player then we'll be able to host bigger events again.

[SynMonger]

I'll throw my two cents in:

 

I'd love to see a command line dedicated server for linux. It's not an unreasonable request, just as the majority of home users have Windows, the majority of affordable servers for rent will be running some distribution of linux.

[Stealthbird97]

Well back to the actual theme of the topic.

 

I'v only really skim read the whole topic as i've just let it go for a while and i might say this has been far more successful than any other post i have done it a forum, only being looked at about 40 people at a max.

 

Anyhoo! I'f I'm not mistaken there is a guess/theory that ED will be producing a Dedicated Server for DCS A10.

 

I'm assuming this will be a free download free that will work with all of the DCS games as they use the same basic code.

[Rhinox]

...I'm assuming this will be a free download free that will work with all of the DCS games as they use the same basic code.

I doubt. DCS is written for windows, and I do not think they coded it in gcc. So probably substantial amount of work must be invested in 1. stripping the whole gfx-stuff, and 2. porting the code to linux. From this point of view, dedi-server for Windows would be much easier to do. On the other side, I think for us (users) linux dedicated server would be better. It is easier to find linux hosting services and frequently cheaper (at least costs for system-license falls off).

 

And although there might be games where dedicated server is free of charge, I doubt it will be the case of DCS. And honestly, I do not care (if the price for dedi-server license do not exceed let's say $100). But I think dedicated server would definitely boost selling numbers for the whole DCS-serie and make it more popular...

[Stealthbird97]

I doubt. DCS is written for windows, and I do not think they coded it in gcc.

 

My For all DCS Games i mean't all of the editions A10, Ka-50 etc.