|
Post by Deathsightt on Dec 19, 2017 8:25:16 GMT -8
Error code: FFXI-3001
No response from the FINAL FANTASY XI server. Connection timed out. Press OK to shut down.
|
|
selk
Dreams of Mithra Tail
Posts: 1,159
|
Post by selk on Dec 19, 2017 10:05:06 GMT -8
I noticed an error before I went to bed last night but nobody was on and didn't think that it had any major impact. My bad. The server is up now.
|
|
selk
Dreams of Mithra Tail
Posts: 1,159
|
Post by selk on Dec 19, 2017 17:46:26 GMT -8
Alright! It's been an exciting afternoon... Due to a mistake with one of my VMs it caused a cascading corruption effect to all of my machines. When I first noticed it happen to another server I immediately backed up the XI database and code out of a paranoid belief it could happen to the XI server. About an hour or so later the XI server corrupted. Due to the fact I have a day job it took me awhile before I could get to work on it. The actual restore took about 1.5 hours for all of my machines.
I have ordered an additional hard drive for the server to make backups and restores faster. I also will be focusing on writing a database backup automation program that will run hourly so we can minimize player data loss in the event of a future occurrence.
All player data since approx 1PM was lost. This was probably only about 1 to 1.5 hour worth of player activity.
Edit: Typos
|
|
Darkmage
Certified Taru Therapist
I casts the spells that make the peoples falls down
Posts: 884
|
Post by Darkmage on Dec 19, 2017 18:51:41 GMT -8
I've never been fully confident in virtual box, if you ever want to switch that machine over to full VM host and host your win 10 as a VM, both MS and VMware offer free VM host server products. MS offers Hyper-v server, which is basically a free, GUI less hyper-v host, and VMware offer something similar, both can and really are designed to be remotely managed (via GUI application), VMWare can be managed from pretty much anything, MS's Hyper-V has variable requirements depending on which version you get. The MS Hyper-V free 2016 requires windows 10 pro to manage, and I think the 2012 version requires windows 7 or 8 to manage. If, for some inexplicable reason, you had a copy of Windows Server 2012 or 2016 lying around, both are designed so that you can run a single copy installed on the physical hardware to act as a hyper-v host (The full server install with hyper-V role gives you full windows GUI management on machine, no remote management needed) with and 2 VM copies of that server, all included in a single license.
I have some experience with the VMware product (https://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere-hypervisor.html ) and a little with the free version of the MS hyper-v server, though most of my MS stuff is full install with the 2 VMs. Also, VMWare makes a free product similar to virtualbox (https://my.vmware.com/en/web/vmware/free#desktop_end_user_computing/vmware_workstation_player/14_0 ) that I've always found to be more stable.
|
|
selk
Dreams of Mithra Tail
Posts: 1,159
|
Post by selk on Dec 21, 2017 16:55:30 GMT -8
So I finished the Automated Database Backup program the other night and I currently have it running hourly. In the event of a system failure we will not lose (much) data. I was debating whether an hour is too short and whether it should be run more often. Also, I wanted to see if there was any performance impact and as far as I can tell there has not been. Everyone OK with an hour?
I'm still considering how I want to handle an automated code-server backup system since the database backups run ~5MB whereas the actual server code and build run ~300MB.
For those interested in a little more technical minutiae, every hour the database table is exported from mysql (approx 56MB) and rar compressed (approx 5MB) then stored on a 15TB RAID5 (eventually I'll bump this to RAID6, but, $$). Nightly the RAID5 is sync'd to another 15TB RAID for added redundancy. The latest backup is also stored locally on the server for quick recovery in the event of a sql server-only failure.
|
|
selk
Dreams of Mithra Tail
Posts: 1,159
|
Post by selk on Dec 21, 2017 17:12:20 GMT -8
I've never been fully confident in virtual box, if you ever want to switch that machine over to full VM host and host your win 10 as a VM, both MS and VMware offer free VM host server products. MS offers Hyper-v server, which is basically a free, GUI less hyper-v host, and VMware offer something similar, both can and really are designed to be remotely managed (via GUI application), VMWare can be managed from pretty much anything, MS's Hyper-V has variable requirements depending on which version you get. The MS Hyper-V free 2016 requires windows 10 pro to manage, and I think the 2012 version requires windows 7 or 8 to manage. If, for some inexplicable reason, you had a copy of Windows Server 2012 or 2016 lying around, both are designed so that you can run a single copy installed on the physical hardware to act as a hyper-v host (The full server install with hyper-V role gives you full windows GUI management on machine, no remote management needed) with and 2 VM copies of that server, all included in a single license. I have some experience with the VMware product (https://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere-hypervisor.html ) and a little with the free version of the MS hyper-v server, though most of my MS stuff is full install with the 2 VMs. Also, VMWare makes a free product similar to virtualbox (https://my.vmware.com/en/web/vmware/free#desktop_end_user_computing/vmware_workstation_player/14_0 ) that I've always found to be more stable. I like VirtualBox. It's open-source and actually a really great platform from well established companies. VMware requires a Pro license for the features I need the most whereas VirtualBox provides all the features of VMware I'd want and use for free. A few VMware (free) features missing: cross-platform compatibility on the core version, cli, seamless mode, encryption. I run several VMs on the same machine and this just isn't possible without paying for VMware. VMware suffers from potential corruption the same as VB. The server itself is linux based so any MS VM solution is immediately out of the question. Thanks for your input though. If for some reason it were to happen again I might consider migrating my VMs but for now I'm sticking with it. Edit: I moved another post which happened to appear above this one so I added the Quote.
|
|
Darkmage
Certified Taru Therapist
I casts the spells that make the peoples falls down
Posts: 884
|
Post by Darkmage on Dec 22, 2017 0:42:07 GMT -8
I just never had any luck with virtual box, so I have a personal bias. As a side note, MS's hyper-v doesn't discriminate against VMs, I have a linux pbx server running on one of mine, VM host is vm host.
|
|