Forum

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
  1. #16
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    PA, U.S.
    Posts
    35
    Strange I only used 200 Megabits!? for 1 day 14 hours and I'm using speedx 32KHz at 10 quality and I had 2 people talking for 5 hours and 1 person idle the whole time.



    EDIT:
    Or did I read that wrong? If I do the math with what I'm using per second now I get that 104 Megabytes would be used per day. That sound right?

  2. #17
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    PA, U.S.
    Posts
    35
    I think the OP did the math wrong.

    Here's what I'm using per second idle: 371 Bytes in, 835 Bytes out.

    so: 371 + 835 = 1206 Bytes

    1206 x 60 = 72360 Bytes per minute

    72360 x 60 = 4341600 Bytes per hour

    4341600 x 24 = 104198400 Bytes per day

    104198400 / 1000000 = 104.1984 Megabytes per day

    Dividing 104198400 by 1 million because 1 million bytes is one megabyte.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    17
    after thinking about it and looking at the different ways ts2 and ts3 display data in their respective "Server Connection info" window i might have an explanation for why we see the "dramatic" increase in idle bandwidth:
    The ts2 "server connection info" window is not updated once it is opened whereas the ts3 window is updated quite frequently.
    So my guess is that the additional information needed to display the server values is transfered with each update of the window and that will increase the "meassured" idle bandwidth significantly. Though the displayed values seem to be somewhat accurate, as i see roughly the same values when i use other tools to meassure the used bandwidth, they might not be what someone (including me ) would expect them to be.

    My conclusion: in this special scenario with one idle user the values that the ts3 client displays in its "(server) connection info" window might be interpreted incorrectly, while still being correct

    Even with the idle bandwidth consumption being not as bad as it may look like, any reduction in needed bandwidth will be highly appreciated (most likely not only by me)

    best regards

  4. #19
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    PA, U.S.
    Posts
    35
    I just had 5 people on. 2 active people in 2 different channels and 1 idle. With one person talking in each of the 2 channels talking bandwidth shot up to 10kiBs to 29kiBs, if it averaged 20kiBs that'd be 20x more than my idle estimate at 104miBs to 2 gigs per day. Seems like a lot for voice server, but not insane.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    PA, U.S.
    Posts
    35
    Here I am trying to get a ton of people on my ts to monitor usage when all I had to do was look at the public ts's usage. Here it is with 299 clients on:


  6. #21
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    379
    i dont see what the problem is guys.

    If your renting a server, it will work - no issues.

    If your hosting a server - host it on a dedicated box with good bandwith.


    If your worried because your hosting this yourself on your own PC on a home connection then: rent or get a dedicated box.

    Blame your ISP's for not being up to date. TS3 dosent send that much info at all, but if your hosting it yourself - it will because its relative to the bandwith available.

    And i personally dont want features / qaulity to be sacraficed for people who will not get a dedicated box or rent a server, that is stupidity.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    PA, U.S.
    Posts
    35
    I don't have a problem. I need to get a feel for bandwidth usage because I plan on selling TS servers. It adds up when you have 1000+ users on 1 box.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by JakkFrosted View Post
    I don't have a problem. I need to get a feel for bandwidth usage because I plan on selling TS servers. It adds up when you have 1000+ users on 1 box.
    i understand, i think Ralph ( Dev ) mentioned reducing the bandwith where possible.

    Beta's will change so keep up to date with the changes, good luck with your hosting business

  9. #24
    Join Date
    December 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    17
    the problem is not bandwidth usage on a loaded server. The initial post (and me also) was concerned about the bandwidth _one_ idle client would consume with absolutly no voice traffic transmitted.
    The pictures in the initial post illustrated exactly that: there seemed to be a huge increase in bandwidth usage for an absolutly idle connection:

    ~24bytes/sec -> ~700bytes/sec

    that would be an increase by a factor of more than 25.
    i did some measurements which showed an increase by a factor of 1.8 what i would consider more likely to be correct.

    And as confirmed by R. Ludwig the values shown in ts3 are not directly comparable to the values shown in ts2.

    please close this thread now.thx.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. TS3 Client issue. Extreme outbound traffic.
    By Unforgivents in forum Windows
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 24th, 2013, 10:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •