13 Aug, 2008, Duo wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Damsol-hosting.com is a new mud hosting service with competitive rates starting as low as $3 per month also we do have limited free accounts..

so come have a look, what have you got to lose

Damsol Hosting
13 Aug, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
Isn't the RAM you allot for the first several packages all but useless? The data files on disk don't fit in that little space, let alone in memory with all the extra overhead. Granted, it makes sense given what the cost is, it's just that it's odd to advertise low rates, when those rates are for things that are more or less useless.
13 Aug, 2008, Guest wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Hmm. Yeah. People are going to need at least a Tier 2 level account. Even the leanest of lean codebases will be pushing the 10MB barrier right out of the box.
13 Aug, 2008, The_Fury wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
I think eldhamud would be able to use the free package, top is reporting that im using 2% of 160meg of ram allocated. Which is just under 4megs of ram, assuming that top reports right. Tho there are no connections to it and the room count is low, and i know i would kill the 1% processor as soon as my overland mobiles reset or someone connects. 15 megs of ram should be the minimum offering IMO, that gives most games the room they need to run and grow.
13 Aug, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
I'd have to see the line from top before I believed that. Either that, or your game only has a handful of rooms. :wink:
13 Aug, 2008, Conner wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
Well, David, he did say:
The_Fury said:
and the room count is low

So, perhaps a handful of rooms
So, perhaps a handful of rooms [b[i]is[/i][/b] all he's talking about on that particular copy of the codebase.


(And that makes my 1,111th post.. I've reached my goal.)
13 Aug, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
Well, by "low", one could mean several hundred. By handful, I mean less than 50. It is very surprising that it would be using only a few mb of memory at all times. I suspect that what he meant is that only a few mb were resident in memory at that instant, and the rest was swapped out. That is not very helpful when you need to do things that require more stuff in active memory at once, e.g. during boot.
13 Aug, 2008, Conner wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
I'll grant you that he's talking pretty incredibly low ram usage and may very well be talking only about resident memory, but don't we usually only read the RES column from top for that determination anyway?
13 Aug, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Whatever we usually do or don't do, I'm not sure it makes sense to do something so imprecise when trying to determine whether a very small amount of RAM is sufficient to run the average MUD. :wink: After all, there is more to RAM usage than spot usage at a given time. You need to look at min/max, for example.
13 Aug, 2008, The_Fury wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Here you go David, here is the Top output, i will also include the mem output from within the game itself for room counts and the like. Something that i had i didnt notice was that the overland mobiles were not loaded, loading them up makes a huge difference to things, firstly is without mobiles, then after that is with mobiles.
PID     USER       PR  NI   VIRT RES  SHR  S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
30229 xxxxx 34 19 5060 1512 1104 S 0 0.9 0:00.16 eldhamud

System Memory [arguments - hash, check, showhigh]
Affects: 9 Areas: 10
ExtDes: 7 Exits: 4202
Helps: 556 Resets: 65
IdxMobs: 97 Mobiles: 38
IdxObjs: 214 Objs: 29(29)
Rooms: 2710 VRooms: 0
Shops: 6 RepShps: 1
CurOq's: 0 CurCq's: 0
Players: 1 Maxplrs: 2
MaxEver: 150 Topsn: 95(500)
MaxEver was recorded on: Fri Jun 6 07:49:10 2008


Now With Mobs Loaded.
PID    USER        PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR   S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
30229 xxxxx 34 19 11664 9520 1228 S 3 5.8 0:02.29 eldhamud


System Memory [arguments - hash, check, showhigh]
Affects: 9 Areas: 10
ExtDes: 7 Exits: 4202
Helps: 556 Resets: 65
IdxMobs: 97 Mobiles: 7769
IdxObjs: 214 Objs: 4726(4726)
Rooms: 2710 VRooms: 0
Shops: 6 RepShps: 1
CurOq's: 0 CurCq's: 0
Players: 1 Maxplrs: 2
MaxEver: 150 Topsn: 95(500)
MaxEver was recorded on: Fri Jun 6 07:49:10 2008


Besides the memory blowing out to over 11 megs, the cpu is sitting constant on about 3%, i guess dealing with 7K mobs is rather taxing on processor time.

Quote
Whatever we usually do or don't do, I'm not sure it makes sense to do something so imprecise when trying to determine whether a very small amount of RAM is sufficient to run the average MUD. :wink: After all, there is more to RAM usage than spot usage at a given time. You need to look at min/max, for example.


I think that sort of proves the point, eldhamud code will run on the OP's lowest package, but you cannot do anything with it, the same could be said for many other codebases, you can make them run in less than 5megs, but you will pretty much only be able to do nothing but build 1 or 2 areas at a time with no other areas loaded. Oh and of those 2K rooms mem reports, only 3 or 4 hundred have descriptions, that too is going to reduce memory foot print by a lot.
14 Aug, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Resets: 65
Mobiles: 38
Objs: 29(29)

Err, 'nuff said, I think, that a real MUD couldn't actually operate in 5mb. "Real MUD" has nothing to do with the codebase; it has to do with whether the MUD is being used for production. I suspect that most SMAUG bases would be quite small if you emptied them of all of their memory.

Quote
Oh and of those 2K rooms mem reports, only 3 or 4 hundred have descriptions, that too is going to reduce memory foot print by a lot.

Yes… another reason why all of this is really not a very realistic estimate of how much a MUD meant for actual player consumption won't run in that little memory.

So yes, I rest my case at this point. :smile: Such stringent memory limits are useful only to play around with a codebase; as soon as somebody wants to do anything useful like start building the whole world, more memory is needed.
17 Aug, 2008, Brinson wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
ROM boots into 12mbs of ram, right?

As far as I'm concerned less than that is too little.

Edit: I think you can run Lambdamoo on this little RAM (boots around 3mb I think, the base DB is only 2.2 mbs) but once you had a few players and ANY items or ANY custom code it would go over.
21 Aug, 2008, Fizban wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
I'm curious, will sign up and try using tbaMUD with only 3 zones, I'm afraid it still might push the envelope…

Stock tbaMUD WITH all zones: 18.432 MB

- zones: 2 MB
So, yes it can run just fine, but most muds don't run like this….

> show stats
Current stats:
1 players in game 1 connected
1 registered
84 mobiles 97 prototypes
116 objects 175 prototypes
108 rooms 3 zones
160 triggers 21 shops
1 large bufs 1 autoquests
1 buf switches 0 overflows
21 Aug, 2008, Guest wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
Yeah, stock AFKMud would collapse right out the gate with no zones at all. The overland code by itself would eat all available space in the account.

So would a Smaug with the overland snippet applied.

SmaugFUSS and/or stock Smaug might make it in just under the wire with no zones. But with zones it's out of the question.
21 Aug, 2008, The_Fury wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
Samson said:
So would a Smaug with the overland snippet applied.


It all depends on how the overland is configured. In its 3 1000x1000 room maps form well that's already 9megs of data, drop it back to 1 map and a stock fuss and it might just crawl in under the 5 megs limit.

Interestingly, the eldhamud exe weighs in at 3.3megs with overland and the fuss exe without it 4.5 megs on my system, i know i have chopped out a lot of code but i did not think that it equate to that much of a reduction in exe size.
05 Sep, 2008, Fizban wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
Got curious when I just saw someone on the CWG forums as being hosted by this company as to how they were able to run with its requirements so I looked and seems they did indeed remove their ridiculous ram/cpu limitations since they posted here.
05 Sep, 2008, David Haley wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
Very good, that was a smart move. Now $3/month is actually a pretty good deal for what is offered for the lowest tier, and the offers remain pretty reasonable as you go up. It is however unfortunate that the website is asking for donations to keep the business going… :thinking:
Random Picks
0.0/17