Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: May 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: the core files

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: the core files

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <paulz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: the core files
From: Vasco Alexandre Da Silva Costa <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 21:46:14 +0100 (WET DST)

On Fri, 23 May 2003, Reinier Post wrote:

> > I suspect that this is the result of an "ulimit -t" call. *searching*
> > Yes there is such code in the start script:
> >
> >   cpulimit=5000
> >   ulimit -S -t $cpulimit
> >
> > So a server is killed if it uses more then 5000s CPU time.
> I have no idea what a reasonable value would be.
> We can wrap the civserver call in "time" to record it.

I guess the new AI or something else uses more CPU cycles than it used
to and it wastes the allocated slice of CPU time.

But what is the point of adding limits to overall CPU consumption? That
seems to be a bit hard to me.
What if someone runs a game with many AI's or for a long time and wastes the
slice anyway?
Why not just 'nice' the civserver processes? IIRC pubserver runs in a
separate machine so it is not like we risk losing essential services for
a short time if a particular process starts hogging CPU.

In alternative civserver could catch SIGXCPU and exit(0) instead of with
an error. No core dumps but you would get some angry players who got
their server nuked in mid game. I do not like that solution much.


Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa @ Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisboa

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]