toxiproxy VS cpulimit

Checkout also shopify's awesome tool called toxiproxy: https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy

It turns out to be also a very good way to test a networking library by implementing it. Since your stack needs to be able to basically handle most adverse events properly.

The idea behind 'chaos engineering' is cool.

I use this to simulate delays between various local services:

https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy

If you have Docker all you need is a few terminal commands

Idk about firewall level, but application level I’d recommend https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy

That's why I usually recommend anybody that develops network critical apps to test their app with something like toxiproxy and purposfully mess with their connections and simulate network issues.

We use this thing. https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy I am not sure that it supports windows, but you can install it to the Linux machine and route your application under the test to that proxy.

On the same vibes as https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy

https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy is a perfect solution for that. I used it quite successfully years ago and it looks like it's still pretty active.

Looking at the toxiproxy you mentioned, it seems like it should do what you want though? TLS is generally over TCP anyway, so it should still be able to throttle those connections - it just wont understand the encryption. I also saw a pull request for having it act as a TLS man-in-the-middle proxy: https://github.com/Shopify/toxiproxy/pull/270

I even tried using Cpulimit to try limiting it to 90%. Idk, the program tells to set a number from 0 to 400 which would be the percentage of the cpu and since mine has 4c/4t i´ve ran with 360, which managed to limit around 90%. Also, i´ve tried using 90 as argument and CPU was limited aroud 20% to 25% of usage, so i think i use it right.

A few days ago I discovered cpulimit. It's a great tool that nicely (haha) complements nice. Where nice is normally used to reduce the amount of CPU a process uses by changing it priority, a niced process can still end up using more CPU than you want, and will of course use all that it wants if nothing with a higher priority comes along.

Thanks for your elaborate notes! This is helpful information.

When I tried your commands, on Arch via libcgroup-git, `cgcreate -g cpu:cpulimit` only results in `cgcreate: can't create cgroup cpulimit: Cgroup, requested group parameter does not exist`, for some reason. But this is not a support ticket, I have not researched this at all yet. But cgroups only limit some processes anyway, never the entire core(s) - so it seems one could also simply use cpulimit [1] instead which emulates by sending SIGSTOP and SIGCONT.

About cooling_deviceN: While this does limit cpu functionality, this seems to only also set `scaling_max_freq` to an appropriate value, throttling because the fans are disabled. Not more useful than setting the frequency manually I presume.

[1] https://github.com/opsengine/cpulimit

A bit different from what you're asking but for this kind of use, I generally use cpulimit (link). It allows you to artificially limit the amount of CPU consumed by a process.

Dunno then. You could try cpulimit, and then do cpulimit -l 5 %command% in launch settings for the game in Steam.