[ENet-discuss] 4 seconds stalls.. congestion problem?

[Chris Jurney]

Brutal Legend sends 30 updates a second for 4 players or less reliably with
no problems.  For 5 or more, we go down to 15 packets a second (although
each packet contains 2 game-messages) to reduce the UDP/VDP/eNet overhead.
If you're sending this many updates, the main consumer of bandwidth is the
headers, so be very careful that you're sending your enet ACKs in the same
packet as your next send.  You can tell if this is the case using any wire
sniffer and seeing if you're firing 30 or 60 UDP frames per second.  If it's
60, you need to process incoming messages before sending new ones and
flushing.

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Chris Meub <chrismeub at gmail.com> wrote:

> Does anyone have experience using enet with a multiplayer game sending
> reliable packets ~20 times a second or more?
> I imagine most people sending that many packets are using unreliable.
>
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Lee Salzman <lsalzman at gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, the point is to get all available packets in this frame and not
> stall,
> > i.e. it is polling. You wouldn't use a non-zero timeout in a game's
> client
> > loop like that.
> >
> > Lee
> >
> > On 11/21/2010 02:31 PM, Mark Palkow wrote:
> >
> > Couldn't the problem be
> >
> > while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 0) > 0 )
> >
> > because it takes all the CPU (100%)?
> > shouldn't it be something like:
> >
> > while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 10) > 0 )
> >
> > so that the CPU gets a chance to handle other task like the network
> stack?
> > regards Mark
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: enet-discuss-bounces at cubik.org [mailto:
> enet-discuss-bounces at cubik.org]
> > Im Auftrag von Chris Meub
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. November 2010 08:39
> > An: Discussion of the ENet library
> > Betreff: Re: [ENet-discuss] 4 seconds stalls.. congestion problem?
> >
> > I am doing this every 1/60th second:
> >
> >    while( enet_host_service (client, & event, 0) > 0 )
> >    {
> >          switch (event.type)
> >          {
> >               case ENET_EVENT_TYPE_RECEIVE:
> >                       // ( handle packet )
> >                       enet_packet_destroy (event.packet);
> >                       break;
> >                 case ENET_EVENT_TYPE_DISCONNECT: // (handle disconnect
> here)
> >        }
> >    }
> >
> > As I understand it that will process all available events.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Lee Salzman <lsalzman at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > In the client, make sure you repeatedly call enet_host_service() until it
> > returns no events, otherwise it may possibly not service the network at
> >
> >
> > all
> >
> >
> > if it gets backlogged.
> >
> > Lee
> >
> > On 11/20/2010 07:41 PM, Chris Meub wrote:
> >
> > It does *not* exhibit the stalling behavior when I run on LAN or on
> > the same machine.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Jay Sprenkle <jsprenkle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Have you tried running both on the same physical machine, or on two
> >
> >
> > machines
> >
> >
> > within your control?
> > Perhaps it's caused by comcast equipment.
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:52 PM, Chris Meub <chrismeub at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The server is hosted on a dedicated hosting provider M5, but I have
> > also tried putting the server on a friend's home Ubuntu server with
> > the exact same intermittent stalling behavior.
> >
> > The client is under a router and cable modem with comcast
> >
> > pinging the server averages 49ms at the moment, 32ms from another
> > network ive tested
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ENet-discuss mailing list
> > ENet-discuss at cubik.org
> > http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> ENet-discuss mailing list
> ENet-discuss at cubik.org
> http://lists.cubik.org/mailman/listinfo/enet-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cubik.org/pipermail/enet-discuss/attachments/20101123/d95a90fd/attachment-0001.html>