Jominer's Guide To Server Performance!

[jominer247]

Add me on skype for the information on how to improve your server performance:

 

Jominer247.

Edited April 28, 2014 by jominer247

[disconsented]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth

ECC is not a requirement, it is for when data corruption cannot be tolerated (aka scientific or finical work), for most servers you will not need to go above 4GB of ram.
Also the difference between SSD's and HDD's its not tiny its HUGE [1] [2] [3] , HDD's are great for persistent storage but for Random Read/Write as well as general IO SSD > HDD (aka what world loading uses the most of)

 

Also the big reason's why linux is primarily used for servers:

1. Uptime/Reliability
2. Resource usage
3. Security (Normal lack of root access makes social engineering much harder than on windows)
4. Open Source (aka if shit is broke you can fix it)

Also experience =/= its right

Multicraft runs just as well on windows as on linux

If you don't even understand what the MHZ Myth is its pretty safe to call bullshit on your experience(and practically everything else you said)

Edited April 28, 2014 by disconsented

[jominer247]

I do understand ECC Is not a requirement.

Although it does help with server stability.

 

And no, The difference between HDDs and SSDs is not as big as you think. EC Ran just as well on either. No need to go SSDs for me so I am just sharing my knowledge.

 

I have also come to find Windows as being more secure then Linux, and Multicraft does not run as well on windows in a hosts perspective (Automated mods installation etc).

 

MHz is even used by microsoft, To commonly describe the speed of the RAM.

 

I know what im talking about bro

And yes I do understand very well about the MHz Myth, And was just using it for User-Friendliness (Something Linux isnt very good at either) And I do understand RAM should be described in GB/s just the same as Disk space.

 

Joseph.

Edited April 28, 2014 by jominer247

[jominer247]

Also, Your examples are based on webservers, which are much, MUCH less server intensive then minecraft.

 

Joseph.

[jominer247]

Also people reffer to OVH as crap.

Well heres some points on it:

 

Dedicated Server Speed:

Excellent: 5 stars

 

Support:

Extremely Poor: 0 Stars

 

If you want a server, But need support go to a minecraft hosting company like MineOcity (tekkithost) or FragNet.

 

Otherwise if you dont need support and your buying a dedicated server - The host should not have a HUGE effect (other then graphical panel) on the server itself.

[plowmanplow]

@jominer247:

 

You are providing anecdotal evidence for processes and engineering solutions you obviously understand poorly at best. Disconsented has provided links to clear evidence that some of your statements/observations (specifically related to Linux) are blatantly incorrect. Your anecdotal observations about RAM allocation/usage and your (frankly amusing) references to "MHz" are misleading and unhelpful.

 

I don't say this to poke at you or be purposefully negative (although there might be a bit of snark up there). The community is made richer when more folks contribute more and varied support for everything from making a modpack to running a server. However, a lot of people who come to these forums have little engineering and/or other technical background and take what they see as gospel without doing their own research. Bold claims about minimum requirements need to be supported with clear evidence from the community/industry both to show that you are accurate and complete but also to provide a way for people to better educate themselves about the subject matter.

Edited April 28, 2014 by plowmanplow

[dwwojcik]

I have a server that runs Tekkit with no lag. Windows XP, 32 bit so only 1 GB of probably slow RAM, and a 2.3 Ghz processor (Or something)

Now, it's only had four people on it at a time, but the complete absence of lag is still pretty impressive considering all the laggy machinery in Tekkit.

[jominer247]

@dwwojcik

 

Windows XP is an excellent Operating System, 64 or 32 bit, 1GB of ram and a 2.3GHz processor is MORE then enough to cope with 4 players, therefore I would highly doubt your server would lag anyways.

On tekkit, depending on the version ofc, if its tekkit classic (My best area) Then I'd say you can take upto 10 players (1GB of ram can take 24 - But your processor isnt the best) depending on your network of course.

 

For 1 players i'd reccomend, for them to have the best experience go to www.speedtest.net and record your upload speed, for 4 players (Including yourself) I would reccomend about 5MB/s upload speed

 

But as I say again, Windows XP is a very fast OS that doesnt use to many resources, It's an excellent OS for minecraft servers, Windows Server 2008 would be better, But sadly I could not get emeraldcraft working on that OS, (Or any tekkit server infact, FML didnt like the OS, IDK why :/)

 

However, In terms of hardware aint my best area anyways, Software is indeed a good place for me

[disconsented]

@dwwojcik

 

Windows XP is an excellent Operating System, 64 or 32 bit, 1GB of ram and a 2.3GHz processor is MORE then enough to cope with 4 players, therefore I would highly doubt your server would lag anyways.

On tekkit, depending on the version ofc, if its tekkit classic (My best area) Then I'd say you can take upto 10 players (1GB of ram can take 24 - But your processor isnt the best) depending on your network of course.

 

For 1 players i'd reccomend, for them to have the best experience go to www.speedtest.net and record your upload speed, for 4 players (Including yourself) I would reccomend about 5MB/s upload speed

 

But as I say again, Windows XP is a very fast OS that doesnt use to many resources, It's an excellent OS for minecraft servers, Windows Server 2008 would be better, But sadly I could not get emeraldcraft working on that OS, (Or any tekkit server infact, FML didnt like the OS, IDK why :/)

 

However, In terms of hardware aint my best area anyways, Software is indeed a good place for me

What no.

XP is a HORRIBLE OS almost solely due to the security aspect of it

Here is 727 different security vulnerabilities in xp

You could also say that DOS is a fast aspect due to your reasoning

 

MHz myth again

1GB of ram can take 24

If they are all within the same chunk then yeah but once they spread out hell no.

[freakachu]

for the guy saying XP is great, XP is now 100% swiss cheese in terms of security.  it's no longer supported by MS in terms of updates, and is eclipsed in basically every way by 7.  if you want low resource usage, I hear OS/2 is AMAZING!

 

why stop there though? MS-DOS is pretty sweet, but you might have a hard time getting java to run.  might have to use EMM.

[jominer247]

I fully understand what you are saying.

 

XP Is very insecure and not good for large servers.

 

But is a great OS in other ways (not for servers) But I guess running a small private server for some friends is good on XP.

Edited May 22, 2014 by jominer247

[freakachu]

I fully understand what you are saying.

 

XP Is very insecure and not good for large servers.

 

But is a great OS in other ways (not for servers) But I guess running a small private server for some friends is good on XP.

the only conceivable reason for choosing XP over a more recent OS like 7, or even 8 for that matter, that I can come up with would be for use as a honeypot machine to attract malware and other nasties on purpose.  from a technical standpoint, 7 is literally better in every measurable way.  under the hood, 7 is faster and more efficient than XP.  that was one of the main selling points of the OS when it launched.  I did some digging around to find some xp vs 7 comparisons and as far as I can tell, 7 is only worse when it comes to startup times overall.  even then, it is merely slightly slower to start and still far better than vista (as it should be). 

 

regardless of all that though, by recommending XP you are putting anyone who takes your advice at risk of severe system compromise.  any current and future remote code execution bugs discovered in the OS will not be patched, software that runs on it is no longer updated or supported by vendors.  in a world where almost any idiot with access to google and some ill intent can get ahold of highly sophisticated cracking and exploit kits that don't really require much knowledge to use, an XP machine is a red carpet invitation.  if these were to be machines isolated from the internet that a person might use because they just like the look&feel or whatever of XP that'd be one thing, but that isn't the case here.  under no circumstances should anyone use an XP machine as a server for anything on the internet if they can avoid it. 

[Roversword]

And no one mentiones linux

I do know that chaning your habits and learning new things can be a hindrance (I know that about myself, sometimes I just do not want to change)...but linux offers a rather nice way to run a minecraft server....

 

No particular need to use Windows Xp (or any Microsoft Windows for that matter). Patching is also rather easy.

 

However, I get the feeling that I will not get much love for that

[Roversword]

Also, Your examples are based on webservers, which are much, MUCH less server intensive then minecraft.

 

Joseph.

That is a very very risky thing to say. While YOUR website on YOUR server might not use any performance (because no one is visiting it), I can assure you that even medium sized companies have to shell out quite some money for websites.

And...saying that...there are very few "webservers" left...most of them have whole applications (with databases or acting as first tier in a multitier architectur) and therefor do plenty more that just serving (static) websites

[plowmanplow]

And no one mentiones linux

 

Actually, the first post originally contained a lot of misinformation and anecdotal testaments concerning the awesomeness of Windows and how bad Linux was for hosting. The OP has since removed the content of the post and replaced it with the current "contact me on Skype" message... which no one in their right mind would ever do.