Thread history

Fragment of a discussion from Talk:BeepBoop
Viewing a history listing
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Time User Activity Comment
No results

I'm not sure I follow: what you are saying suggests that skipped turns should happen more on Xor_Sily right? I assume the reason for BeepBoop's low scores is it skipping lots of turns.

--Kev (talk)17:59, 14 July 2021

As an aside, I've also noticed that DrussGT 3.1.7 has also dropped 0.3 APS compared to 3.1.6, maybe it is also getting bad battles with lots of skipped turns?

--Kev (talk)18:01, 14 July 2021

I think it’s some change to energy management. Skipped turns hurt results against weak bots as well, but the decrease seems to be focused near 60+

Xor (talk)03:38, 15 July 2021
 

I mean if you run battles on computers without turbo boost, you should get identical results as Xor_Sily.

Xor (talk)03:36, 15 July 2021

Hmmm I'm still not able to reproduce the low-scoring battles. First of all, turning off turbo boost does change the CPU constant for me (it's ~4e6 with turbo boost on and ~5e6 with turbo boost off, I've recomputed the constant both with/without multiple times and it seems reasonably consistent). But even if I use the 4e6 CPU constant with turbo boost turned off, I am getting essentially the same results as in the image I uploaded. What CPU constant does Xor_Sily use? Maybe as a short-term fix you could add BeepBoop to its roborumble.txt EXCLUDE?

--Kev (talk)07:00, 15 July 2021
Edited by author.
Last edit: 17:39, 15 July 2021

I stopped Xor_Sily. It's some high performance server that costs $40 a week. Maybe we need some test set to verify rumble clients before entry, making it easier to serve a client.

Btw, could you re-submit a version and run rumbles on your machine, and see if we can get the correct result now?

Xor (talk)16:56, 15 July 2021

I think the problem is that Xor_Sily is running 7/24, for months. If memory leak happens, GC will get worse and worse. Maybe I should add some auto restart script later and try again.

Xor (talk)17:10, 15 July 2021

You can set the max iterations in the client and run it in a bash loop.

Skilgannon (talk)22:44, 15 July 2021
 

What sort of high performance server is this? If it's virtualized rather than true dedicated, it wouldn't surprise me if the exact amount of available CPU varies dramatically from moment-to-moment even if the provider is guaranteeing some number of cores worth of overall performance.

Could be interesting to some time make a tool for measuring the stability of available CPU, based on running rapidly running a series of identical micro-benchmarks and looking at the variations in how long it takes.

Rednaxela (talk)09:54, 16 July 2021