Having done lots of Minecraft modding a decade ago, it's wonderful to see that the community is still active enough for there to be inside jokes like these.
Given the size of the game, it's not an easy feat to build a Minecraft server in any language. Yet there are seven, in just Rust alone??
The performance differences look pretty impressive from the benchmarks. I do notice that world generation and saving features are missing though, and these tend to be pretty expensive operations. Chunk gen especially can bring a weaker VPS to its knees. I'm sure the benchmarks were taken at an idle state, but I'd be curious to see how it compares once those features are included and being used.
I don't see it listed, but is there support for block breaking/placing yet? Presumably this would require light recalculation and a chunk update on the server.
Finally, do you plan to add advanced features like scoreboard, teams, or command block parsing in general? Mojang has at least open-sourced Brigadier for that.
Cool project. Hope to see it mature to the point of making servers easier to run on low-end hardware.
Chunk gen makes sense to implement last or never. If you want a performant Minecraft server you need to pregen all the chunks anyway. You can still later regen chunks that have never been visited to get new chunkgen on updates since chunks store the inhabited time.
I think Minecraft server re-implementations are pretty neat and I like to see when a new one comes out. There are also specific purpose server impls like MCHPRS for doing fast redstone compilation for technical minecraft.
Yep block placing and breaking is already supported, but light currently don't so everything is dark :/, We are working on it.
Yep, We want to add all cool features like scoreboards, teams and we already have a API which is similar to use to Brigadier for our Commands.
Thanks, I would love to give players on low-end hardware the possibility to host servers. I think i may test Pumpkin on a raspberry PI or something one day
I remember Notch talking about the lighting calculations being one of the hardest parts to program, so I can understand that being a challenge.
Mojang made large improvements to the lighting engine in 1.20, bringing it in line with the performance mods Phosphor[1] and Starlight[2]. Despite being deprecated now, they might still offer some useful insight into how to approach such a system in a performant way. You'll need to be mindful of the licenses, but it's likely easier than reverse-engineering Minecraft (even with mappings).
Are there any benchmarks for it? How much faster is it than a vanilla server?
I know Minecraft servers tend to get extremely resource intensive as the player count creep and people run extremely beefy servers to handle the load and still offer poor TPS.
I literally said Holy Shit out loud. This is an incredible improvement, and I'll refer to this in the future when I'm asked if we should make something new in Java.
Keeping in mind that this server appears to implement only a tiny subset of the features the ones it is benchmarked against do... No lighting, mob spawning, mob ai, redstone functionality, tree or plant growth, water/lava flow, etc.
More than a "yes, it should". While loading chunks you need to take redstone, nature and mobs into account. If you don’t - you need to find them and resolve at runtime with even bigger costs, relying solely on difference between programming languages in performance.
Yes but also consider the extensibility accessibility Java gave us. EVERYONE was building Minecraft mods back in the beta days. I might go as far as to say that extensibility is what made Minecraft so great.
What I always found surprising was how many minecraft mods there were despite mojang having absolutely no mod support for the game.
After learning that to make a minecraft mod the process was basically decompile minecraft fight the terrible names provided by the decompiler to make your changes then recompile it, I lost all interest.
No doubt about it. I don't think Minecraft would have gotten as far as fast in the public consciousness without content creators like Yogscast being able to produce so much novel content from modded Minecraft.
As someone who knew about this project from earlier (I had even joined their discord) (currently have just deleted my discord account for better state of mind)
Its really made me happy that hackernews really liked this project (140 upvotes is pretty good in my opinion)
From what I remember , there was one other server as well which also was written in rust but I am not exactly sure
Also , the last time I was at it , it was really really alpha software but it was getting developed at good rate , so I am not sure about its current state (I was there when the author had gone to take his exams IIRC)
Hi. Im so happy there are so many people liking the project, The Project is still pretty WIP but im really working hard on this, i finished my exmans last week and currently in holidays so commits are again back to normal :D
Currently Pumpkin has not much multi-threading but we want to go all in. There is already a good structure for multi-threading, We want to make everything multi-threaded what benefits from it
> Be a drop-in replacement for vanilla or other servers
It seems to me that unless it's a drop-in replacement its not a Minecraft server? Akin to how say an Uno deck isn't a drop-in replacement for a Hearts deck but still both card games but not both Uno decks.
Or is it just meaning that Pumpkin (besides the network) do things differently than vanilla and so you might not be able to open a vanilla created world using Pumpkin?
The common problem with Minecraft server implementations is that they are not bug-for-bug compatible, which will lead to certain techniques (especially redstone contraptions) breaking. The technical Minecraft community depends on many implementation details which not all servers support
I edited in scare quotes for "complete" to make that clearer, but I mean in terms of at least having matching blocks/mobs despite many differing details.
Minecraft has a lot of bugs or otherwise surprising behaviours that parts of the community have come to rely upon. This means that most non-vanilla minecraft servers aren't 100% drop in replacements. You have to make a decision what behaviours you want vs the performance and simplicity gains you will gain.
For example there there are tricks that allow you to delete bedrock blocks. Which then lets you either get onto the roof of the nether, or drop below the bottom of the world. Not all of these tricks will then work depending upon the specific minecraft server.
Another example is that in vanilla you can "bomb" people with experience orbs, the sheer number of orbs on the screen will grind their game to a halt since there are too many objects to track and render. Some minecraft servers work around this by grouping up experience orbs into a single bigger orb. That way you have fewer orbs on screen at once.
One bug abuse that blew my mind recently is the ability to have wireless redstone in vanilla [1]. I fell deep into that rabbit hole after a previous post on here about Bad Apple in Minecraft [2].
it already is, the entire protocol is reverse engineered, there are tools to automatically deobfuscate the code and there is already a full reimplementation of minecraft that also supports servers
the client has to authenticate with a central server and present a ticket to the server it wants to connect to. otherwise clients could impersonate each other easily.
If that's the case, how come nobody seems to be writing improved Minecraft clients?
Ever since I started playing it in the beta days I've been frustrated with how poorly Minecraft performs relative to what it's showing on the screen. (Not that that stopped me from pouring hundreds of hours into the damn thing.)
Well, they do? Sodium, for instance. It's a mod, not a full rewrite, rewriting the client from scratch would mean a lot of boring work like speaking with Mojang's server, but I understand Sodium basically rips out and replaces the entire graphics pipeline of the client.
Yeah, it was always weird how 32x32x48 extreme reactors lagged the game whenever you looked at them, but the moment you looked away everything was fine.
I will give it a try, Thanks for this project. The performance of pure vanilla server jar is so bad. Thats one thing I wish mojang would improve. I know new chunk generation is multithread at least. I also wish they'd officially support some basic control for SMP servers. Something as basic as areas defined by two corner coordinates and basic permissions like place, break, interact. Just a basic config file is fine I can manage the requests/updates ot it using other tools - or a simple commandline utilities in game to ops. Something that lets me not have to always only use an excluse whitelist. I know Paper/waterfall and the others have plugsins for this but theres just something nice about staying pure vanilla. Ive been keep servers alive for a long time now.
Hey, Im happy you want to try it out just keep in mind its not done yet many features are missing, We want to have all the things you listed be configurable in a config file, so i think you will like it. If you have any problems may worth to take a look at https://snowiiii.github.io/Pumpkin/troubleshooting/common_is... or just ask for help on our discord, Have fun :D
Impressive stuff, but I'll be more keen to see an high performance implementation that also supports the vast numbers of Minecraft mods. Forge servers are notoriously slow on bigger modpacks.
"Modern" seems to be used a loose adjective these days for "I rewrote $thing [in Rust]". Minecraft was created in 2011, and is Wikipedia says the last version of the 'classic' edition was released in 2017. So anything after 2017 is now defunct.
I don't mind people rewriting things in <insert-name-of-tech-I-like> but "modern" as a value seems pretty loose, and it's often at least arguable whether it's objectively better!
“Modern” more usually means some new JavaScript thing. In JS land, they consider anything that hasn’t had a commit on main branch in over 3 days to be a dead old project in need of being replaced with something new and “modern” that is up to date with the latest trends and breaking changes from the previous 24 hours of their world.
Usually the hyperbolic superlative for Rust projects is “blazing fast”. Of course, any kind of benchmarks or comparisons with other implementations are completely optional. It is simply enough to “cargo init” and start hammering out code. You don’t even need to consider the characteristics of the algorithms you choose to use! If it’s Rust, it’s “blazing fast”.
Your most starred repo is inferior to a shell one-liner lol. Talk about pot calling the kettle black. Just use the system dict, shuf, grep, and head.
It’s bad form to badmouth someone’s earnest work for sure. I wouldn’t do it normally since I think it’s nice that you actually did something. But if you’re going to sit in a glass house and throw stones you should expect some back.
Fortunately, my house is an underground burrow so I can throw stones with impunity. As ugly as it is to do.
> vulnerabilities decay exponentially. They have a half-life. [...] A large-scale study of vulnerability lifetimes² published in 2022 in Usenix Security confirmed this phenomenon. Researchers found that the vast majority of vulnerabilities reside in new or recently modified code
A study limitation is that they looked only at security-relevant bugs (vulnerabilities). As someone who writes code, I would tend to think that this also goes for bugs without a direct security impact, but I don't have the data to back that notion up
Sorry, I may should not used the term Modern, Lets say the foundation is newer and more optimized than from the Original Minecraft server. Mojang developers have strict deadlines and do not care about performance (like basicly any big Studio today). This results in bad ugly code which only purpose it is to work nothing more. Minecraft was created 2009 btw
I'd argue they care about performance, but they also care about a whole slew of other things that also require prioritization to maintain the game and its cottage industry. Not a huge fan of the constant dogging on mojang everyone loves to engage in...
Its written from the ground up and has a clean foundation (which is not the case in vanilla minecraft server code). We also want to use cool modern features like multi-threading or the rust language which is a modern language designed to fix mistakes from older languages
The limitation isn't the Java version, it's the way the MC code was architected.
Iirc part of original Minecraft's performance limitations were high object create/destroy rate leading to lots of garbage collection. With that in mind, picking a non-GCd language isn't completely crazy.
It was the other way around: say, the original code as written by Notch had functions like setPosition(x,y,z) and it was okay. When Jeb got in charge, he said "it's not object-oriented enough" and rewrote everything to setPosition(position). And boom, 1GB/sec allocations...
Hilarious site but a little unjustified. Out of those, only Valence is a real "this already exists" argument. There's 7 total and the first 3 are dead and the latest 3 (incl pumpkin) are all 2024. And all of the 2024 ones explicitly differentiate themselves from Valence which is more of a framework that focuses on modularity. These latest 3 all look like healthy competitors that are all amicable towards each other
| | released | stars | last_update |
|----------|----------|-------|-------------|
| feather | 19aug | 2,614 | 2 years ago |
| mchprs | 20jun | 1,632 | last month |
| graphite | 22jun | 160 | 2 years ago |
| valence | 22sep | 2,731 | 3 days ago |
| hyperion | 24mar | 361 | today |
| pumpkin | 24jul | 965 | today |
| ferrumc | 24sep | 673 | today |
It's pretty funny how many of these are "Is it a Minecraft server? No. It's a framework with which you can build your own rewrite of Minecraft server."
This got me thinking - is Rust really the right tool for the job? And I thought, Elixir/Erlang feels like the perfect tool. Sure enough, someone did it! Great reference material for someone learning how to do things on the beam https://github.com/thecodeboss/minecraft
Hi, Valence is a framework (similar to Minestom in Java). You have to build everything you self. Pumpkin is not a framework :D. Also Valence is bit unactive (look commits)
That's why I said "clean room implementation". Any reason why Pumpkin does not build on top of Valence?
Would be great to see a more cohesive ecosystem for Minecraft servers in the rust community rather than reinventing the wheel
Just to be clear this sever only works with the current vanilla version of Minecraft? I've been interested in playing again, but on the older Beta builds (1.7.3) prior to the full release versions. These versions aren't supported are they?
Compatibility: refers to the ability for client of the latest mincraft server version to be able to connect to the server (pumpkin) unmodified with all mechanics working.
Drop-in replacement: refer to the ability of a server operator to simply exchange the current installation/executable of the server (be vanilla, paper, cuberite, etc...) for pumpkin while maintaining data, configuration, scripts and mods installed.
Tell you the truth, that doesn't help clarify to me much.
If it is compatible, then can't I 'drop it in'.
They sound like they are saying the same thing.
It is compatible so clients can connect to the server and be fully operational, and thus, I should be able to drop in this server, and use it as a server?
How can it be compatible if it doesn't maintain data, configuration, etc..
Edit:
or is this about Pumpkin files. Pumpkin will maintain it's own files, data, configuration. So it can't just use existing Minecraft data files.
So if it was a new world, Pumpkin would generate new pumpkin formatted files. But couldn't just 'drop it in' on an existing world and use the existing Minecraft data files.
Not sure of long term viability as far as effort, but if it is files, couldn't a converter from MineCraft to Pumpkin file structure, make the server 'drop in'?
"But from a client perspective, both implement HTTP/1.1."
This seems too low level example to apply for Minecraft.
Minecraft has a lot going on, back and forth. For something to be 'compatible' it would need to be so detailed an implementation of the server, that it could potentially also be a 'drop in'.
When it comes to game servers, especially for highly modified games like minecraft, there's the client facing side, including how the game behaves, and then there's the server administration side.
If I were to interpret the statement made here I would assume that not-a-drop-in while being vanilla compliant means things like:
* It won't support server side mods without you re-writing them in rust
* It won't support bukkit plugins without you re-writing them in rust
* It doesn't support the configuration file format that the java server uses
* Maybe it doesn't support the world file format (which would be server side only)
* Maybe it doesn't support the same administrative commands (which you would only see as an administrator)
etc.
So it can definitely be compatible from the client perspective while being woefully incompatible with any prior experience anyone running a minecraft server might have.
Drop-in means replacing an existing thing with a new one without changing anything.
This is not compatible with other servers plugins/data/configurations, so just replacing the binary and expecting to continue where you left off is not possible.
I would say that Minecraft servers by some qualities are really hard to implement (for example generate world as Java would - using Java's random number generator to generate exactly the same world in Rust) or even impossible. But other usages, like walking through existing world with 1000 of your colleagues might be worth of writing a very fast but not a "drop in replacement" server. Or a massive minigame maybe?
Hey, There were already efforts made to rewriting the same random generators from Java, And they work. Same seed as in vanilla, Same Result as in vanilla
It's only deterministic if you feed the seeds into the exact same pseudorandom number generator and fetch random values from it in the exact same order. If you take a single extra random value out of order, then everything ends up different.
"Drop-in" is what enterprise software calls "bug-for-bug compatible" - e.g., replacing RedHat with CentOS (RIP) should work exactly the same, even if the CentOS team found bugs - they report them upstream and do NOT fix them themselves, because code may be relying on the bugs.
This is especially true with complicated vanilla Minecraft setups and red stone machines (Java Minecraft red stone has "bugs" that "shouldn't be there" but cannot be removed now since so much depends on it).
Hey, With Compatibility i mean be compatible with existing Minecraft vanilla client's and also use vanilla logic.
With "Be a drop-in replacement for vanilla or other servers" i mean that if you just replace the existing server file with pumpkin, pumpkin will not load configs/plugins from vanilla/other servers
Curious what protocol you would use, or how you would do it differently? Are there small enhancements to the existing protocol you would do? Genuine open question for the sake of learning.
I would prefer the UDP Protocol over TCP like in Bedrock edition. Im pretty sure many PVP players would love this. Here is much non sense in the Minecraft protocol and things made to work not to be optimized (deadlines). At our discord we even already have a sticker :mojang_nonsense: which will be used quiet often. I also don't understand Mojang's tactic with packet changes, It sometimes looks like they care about Packets not being broken and being backwards compatible but them sometimes they change the whole Networking system (1.20)
Basically any significant Java software uses disproportionate amounts of RAM. My server can easily run a web server, database server, ftp server, memory cache, etc., times a few copies because various containers have their own web server or whatnot, all at the same time. But a single copy of Minecraft is too much, even when everything else is shut down.
That's why I struggle with the server: it's written in Java. Other game servers don't seem to have this problem. If the network protocol were all, that'd be great
(I didn't downvote any of your posts in case you now wonder if that was me)
> A Rust framework for building Minecraft: Java Edition servers.
Through there are currently 3 new rust impl. differentiating themself from Valence. So it's interesting to see how this will develop long term. Like will they be for different use case(1)? Will they merge? Will some die and developers migrate?
(1): There are actually quite a lot of different use cases, i.e. Java Edition is by now mostly about mods so providing different modding capabilities and various "common mods build-in" and similar can be a big target. But so can be wanting to run a mostly vanilla community MC server for quite a bunch of people etc.
https://dayssincelastrustmcserver.com/
Having done lots of Minecraft modding a decade ago, it's wonderful to see that the community is still active enough for there to be inside jokes like these.
Given the size of the game, it's not an easy feat to build a Minecraft server in any language. Yet there are seven, in just Rust alone??
The performance differences look pretty impressive from the benchmarks. I do notice that world generation and saving features are missing though, and these tend to be pretty expensive operations. Chunk gen especially can bring a weaker VPS to its knees. I'm sure the benchmarks were taken at an idle state, but I'd be curious to see how it compares once those features are included and being used.
I don't see it listed, but is there support for block breaking/placing yet? Presumably this would require light recalculation and a chunk update on the server.
Finally, do you plan to add advanced features like scoreboard, teams, or command block parsing in general? Mojang has at least open-sourced Brigadier for that.
Cool project. Hope to see it mature to the point of making servers easier to run on low-end hardware.
Chunk gen makes sense to implement last or never. If you want a performant Minecraft server you need to pregen all the chunks anyway. You can still later regen chunks that have never been visited to get new chunkgen on updates since chunks store the inhabited time.
I think Minecraft server re-implementations are pretty neat and I like to see when a new one comes out. There are also specific purpose server impls like MCHPRS for doing fast redstone compilation for technical minecraft.
Hey. Im impressed with the benchmarks myself tbh.
Yep block placing and breaking is already supported, but light currently don't so everything is dark :/, We are working on it. Yep, We want to add all cool features like scoreboards, teams and we already have a API which is similar to use to Brigadier for our Commands.
Thanks, I would love to give players on low-end hardware the possibility to host servers. I think i may test Pumpkin on a raspberry PI or something one day
I remember Notch talking about the lighting calculations being one of the hardest parts to program, so I can understand that being a challenge.
Mojang made large improvements to the lighting engine in 1.20, bringing it in line with the performance mods Phosphor[1] and Starlight[2]. Despite being deprecated now, they might still offer some useful insight into how to approach such a system in a performant way. You'll need to be mindful of the licenses, but it's likely easier than reverse-engineering Minecraft (even with mappings).
[1] https://github.com/CaffeineMC/phosphor-fabric
[2] https://github.com/PaperMC/Starlight
Will definitely take a look at this, Thank you. Im btw studied the Minecraft code already so i often use the decompiled code as reference.
Are there any benchmarks for it? How much faster is it than a vanilla server?
I know Minecraft servers tend to get extremely resource intensive as the player count creep and people run extremely beefy servers to handle the load and still offer poor TPS.
Hey, Your lucky, i just made benchmarks all this time :D. Check them out https://snowiiii.github.io/Pumpkin/about/benchmarks.html
Please, just use one measurement unit across all measurements for easier comparison (i.e. RAM in MB, time in ms).
Wow. Pumpkin's runtime is way better (faster, much less RAM used) than the Java versions. Congrats.
I wonder what the Kotlin-based Minestom is doing differently that causes it to have numbers between Pumpkin and the Java versions.
For comparison's sake, do you have build times for Pumpkin? I'll assume that's where critics may target.
> For comparison's sake, do you have build times for Pumpkin? I'll assume that's where critics may target.
How bad could it be? I cry while async-stripe crate builds.
[flagged]
Hey, Sorry Im not native english speaker, I will try to fix all grammer issues now thanks :D
I literally said Holy Shit out loud. This is an incredible improvement, and I'll refer to this in the future when I'm asked if we should make something new in Java.
Keeping in mind that this server appears to implement only a tiny subset of the features the ones it is benchmarked against do... No lighting, mob spawning, mob ai, redstone functionality, tree or plant growth, water/lava flow, etc.
These wouldn’t significantly affect the first 10 chunks loaded?
More than a "yes, it should". While loading chunks you need to take redstone, nature and mobs into account. If you don’t - you need to find them and resolve at runtime with even bigger costs, relying solely on difference between programming languages in performance.
Yes but also consider the extensibility accessibility Java gave us. EVERYONE was building Minecraft mods back in the beta days. I might go as far as to say that extensibility is what made Minecraft so great.
What I always found surprising was how many minecraft mods there were despite mojang having absolutely no mod support for the game.
After learning that to make a minecraft mod the process was basically decompile minecraft fight the terrible names provided by the decompiler to make your changes then recompile it, I lost all interest.
Yarn[1] has pretty much fixed this along with fabric.
[1] https://github.com/FabricMC/yarn
No doubt about it. I don't think Minecraft would have gotten as far as fast in the public consciousness without content creators like Yogscast being able to produce so much novel content from modded Minecraft.
I was suprised myself thats its that bad. Well optimized binary is that what your CPU loves not a big JVM runtime
As someone who knew about this project from earlier (I had even joined their discord) (currently have just deleted my discord account for better state of mind) Its really made me happy that hackernews really liked this project (140 upvotes is pretty good in my opinion)
From what I remember , there was one other server as well which also was written in rust but I am not exactly sure
Also , the last time I was at it , it was really really alpha software but it was getting developed at good rate , so I am not sure about its current state (I was there when the author had gone to take his exams IIRC)
Hi. Im so happy there are so many people liking the project, The Project is still pretty WIP but im really working hard on this, i finished my exmans last week and currently in holidays so commits are again back to normal :D
Maybe it's cuberite? written in C I believe
Hello. I recently developed Pumpkin, Its a efficent and fast Minecraft server completely written in Rust from the ground up, Check it out :D
Cool! Would be interesting to understand how to multithreading works? Is it just the "easy" parts or actual operations related to the world as well?
Currently Pumpkin has not much multi-threading but we want to go all in. There is already a good structure for multi-threading, We want to make everything multi-threaded what benefits from it
IMO chuck generation is a great candidate for mutlithreading. Keeping it off the main thread would already be a huge improvement.
> What Pumpkin will not
> Be a drop-in replacement for vanilla or other servers
It seems to me that unless it's a drop-in replacement its not a Minecraft server? Akin to how say an Uno deck isn't a drop-in replacement for a Hearts deck but still both card games but not both Uno decks.
Or is it just meaning that Pumpkin (besides the network) do things differently than vanilla and so you might not be able to open a vanilla created world using Pumpkin?
The common problem with Minecraft server implementations is that they are not bug-for-bug compatible, which will lead to certain techniques (especially redstone contraptions) breaking. The technical Minecraft community depends on many implementation details which not all servers support
In addition to the hundreds of blocks and mobs that would need to be implemented properly and rarely are, the lack of mod support is a killer.
The only "complete" reimplementation of Java Minecraft that I'm aware of is Bedrock.
Far from it. The versions lack a lot of parity and Bedrock is called "bugrock" by the community for a reason
I edited in scare quotes for "complete" to make that clearer, but I mean in terms of at least having matching blocks/mobs despite many differing details.
A lot of the parity issues are due to Bedrock not reimplementing bugs from Java (quasi-connectivity aka "droppers are doors".)
There are no bugs in Minecraft, only features that have yet to be fully documented.
Minecraft has a lot of bugs or otherwise surprising behaviours that parts of the community have come to rely upon. This means that most non-vanilla minecraft servers aren't 100% drop in replacements. You have to make a decision what behaviours you want vs the performance and simplicity gains you will gain.
For example there there are tricks that allow you to delete bedrock blocks. Which then lets you either get onto the roof of the nether, or drop below the bottom of the world. Not all of these tricks will then work depending upon the specific minecraft server.
Another example is that in vanilla you can "bomb" people with experience orbs, the sheer number of orbs on the screen will grind their game to a halt since there are too many objects to track and render. Some minecraft servers work around this by grouping up experience orbs into a single bigger orb. That way you have fewer orbs on screen at once.
One bug abuse that blew my mind recently is the ability to have wireless redstone in vanilla [1]. I fell deep into that rabbit hole after a previous post on here about Bad Apple in Minecraft [2].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLynwXDnETI [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41798369
Are you sharding the main thread into regions (ie. Like paper folia) or is this just breaking of non block-entities to their own threads.
Just waiting for Minecraft to be so reverse engineered as to be its own protocol with multiple server and client implementations that just work.
Bedrock's network protocol is documented: https://github.com/Mojang/bedrock-protocol-docs
it already is, the entire protocol is reverse engineered, there are tools to automatically deobfuscate the code and there is already a full reimplementation of minecraft that also supports servers
Does that mean there are open source clients that can connect to servers without a microsoft account?
If the server is configured to not require server auth.
the client has to authenticate with a central server and present a ticket to the server it wants to connect to. otherwise clients could impersonate each other easily.
There are server mods that remove this requirement though.
If that's the case, how come nobody seems to be writing improved Minecraft clients?
Ever since I started playing it in the beta days I've been frustrated with how poorly Minecraft performs relative to what it's showing on the screen. (Not that that stopped me from pouring hundreds of hours into the damn thing.)
Well, they do? Sodium, for instance. It's a mod, not a full rewrite, rewriting the client from scratch would mean a lot of boring work like speaking with Mojang's server, but I understand Sodium basically rips out and replaces the entire graphics pipeline of the client.
There are tons. There are mods that rewrite graphics rendering, chunk loading, multi-threading, ...
Yeah, it was always weird how 32x32x48 extreme reactors lagged the game whenever you looked at them, but the moment you looked away everything was fine.
I will give it a try, Thanks for this project. The performance of pure vanilla server jar is so bad. Thats one thing I wish mojang would improve. I know new chunk generation is multithread at least. I also wish they'd officially support some basic control for SMP servers. Something as basic as areas defined by two corner coordinates and basic permissions like place, break, interact. Just a basic config file is fine I can manage the requests/updates ot it using other tools - or a simple commandline utilities in game to ops. Something that lets me not have to always only use an excluse whitelist. I know Paper/waterfall and the others have plugsins for this but theres just something nice about staying pure vanilla. Ive been keep servers alive for a long time now.
Hey, Im happy you want to try it out just keep in mind its not done yet many features are missing, We want to have all the things you listed be configurable in a config file, so i think you will like it. If you have any problems may worth to take a look at https://snowiiii.github.io/Pumpkin/troubleshooting/common_is... or just ask for help on our discord, Have fun :D
thank you for your service
Impressive stuff, but I'll be more keen to see an high performance implementation that also supports the vast numbers of Minecraft mods. Forge servers are notoriously slow on bigger modpacks.
How would a server not written in Java support Java mods?
It'd have to be a hybrid, with more of the expensive parts rewritten in a more well suited language.
What does "modern" mean in this context?
"Modern" seems to be used a loose adjective these days for "I rewrote $thing [in Rust]". Minecraft was created in 2011, and is Wikipedia says the last version of the 'classic' edition was released in 2017. So anything after 2017 is now defunct.
I don't mind people rewriting things in <insert-name-of-tech-I-like> but "modern" as a value seems pretty loose, and it's often at least arguable whether it's objectively better!
“Modern” more usually means some new JavaScript thing. In JS land, they consider anything that hasn’t had a commit on main branch in over 3 days to be a dead old project in need of being replaced with something new and “modern” that is up to date with the latest trends and breaking changes from the previous 24 hours of their world.
Usually the hyperbolic superlative for Rust projects is “blazing fast”. Of course, any kind of benchmarks or comparisons with other implementations are completely optional. It is simply enough to “cargo init” and start hammering out code. You don’t even need to consider the characteristics of the algorithms you choose to use! If it’s Rust, it’s “blazing fast”.
Where's that meme of the guy painting demons then laying down on the floor in fear when you need it.
Your most starred repo is inferior to a shell one-liner lol. Talk about pot calling the kettle black. Just use the system dict, shuf, grep, and head.
It’s bad form to badmouth someone’s earnest work for sure. I wouldn’t do it normally since I think it’s nice that you actually did something. But if you’re going to sit in a glass house and throw stones you should expect some back.
Fortunately, my house is an underground burrow so I can throw stones with impunity. As ugly as it is to do.
How do you throw stones out of an underground burrow?
> a shell one-liner lol
Dig a little deeper in the repos and you may eventually find that this is exactly what that started as :^)
> badmouth someone’s earnest work for sure
Was speaking generally. Not meant at OP. I think it’s awesome that they are making a Minecraft server in Rust.
> Talk about pot calling the kettle black
Of course! Anything else would be bad form.
> my house is an underground burrow so I can throw stones with impunity
Sneaky, sneaky ;)
Haha fair play if you’re in the “we’re all clowns here” camp.
> "modern" as a value seems pretty loose, and it's often at least arguable whether it's objectively better!
Well, there is research on this!
https://security.googleblog.com/2024/09/eliminating-memory-s... writes:
> vulnerabilities decay exponentially. They have a half-life. [...] A large-scale study of vulnerability lifetimes² published in 2022 in Usenix Security confirmed this phenomenon. Researchers found that the vast majority of vulnerabilities reside in new or recently modified code
Where ² goes to https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity22/presentat...
A study limitation is that they looked only at security-relevant bugs (vulnerabilities). As someone who writes code, I would tend to think that this also goes for bugs without a direct security impact, but I don't have the data to back that notion up
Feels kinda obvious to me? As time goes on bug density can only go on direction, and making no changes to a codebase certainly doesn’t make it go up.
Sorry, I may should not used the term Modern, Lets say the foundation is newer and more optimized than from the Original Minecraft server. Mojang developers have strict deadlines and do not care about performance (like basicly any big Studio today). This results in bad ugly code which only purpose it is to work nothing more. Minecraft was created 2009 btw
I'd argue they care about performance, but they also care about a whole slew of other things that also require prioritization to maintain the game and its cottage industry. Not a huge fan of the constant dogging on mojang everyone loves to engage in...
People seem to forget that if you already know where the finish line is, the journey on getting there can be made quicker and more efficient.
This, at least in my experience, applies greatly to software and hardware.
Modern in software terms almost always just means recently written. Last couple years. It's a pretty useless adjective to describe software.
E.g. sqlite probably wouldn't be called modern, but everyone loves it so who cares.
Its written from the ground up and has a clean foundation (which is not the case in vanilla minecraft server code). We also want to use cool modern features like multi-threading or the rust language which is a modern language designed to fix mistakes from older languages
> cool modern features like multi-threading
Java 6 had multi-threading
The limitation isn't the Java version, it's the way the MC code was architected.
Iirc part of original Minecraft's performance limitations were high object create/destroy rate leading to lots of garbage collection. With that in mind, picking a non-GCd language isn't completely crazy.
It was the other way around: say, the original code as written by Notch had functions like setPosition(x,y,z) and it was okay. When Jeb got in charge, he said "it's not object-oriented enough" and rewrote everything to setPosition(position). And boom, 1GB/sec allocations...
How horrifying!
I'm just saying, there's nothing "modern" about multi-threading.
I think they are being sarcastic because the vanilla Minecraft server is heavily single threaded.
While Java does, the Minecraft server architecture does not.
I read this in the most satirical way possible like as if a godly narrator said it calmly.
It was really funny. It felt like a Satire LMAO
It has now been 0 days since a new minecraft server was written in Rust https://dayssincelastrustmcserver.com/
Hilarious site but a little unjustified. Out of those, only Valence is a real "this already exists" argument. There's 7 total and the first 3 are dead and the latest 3 (incl pumpkin) are all 2024. And all of the 2024 ones explicitly differentiate themselves from Valence which is more of a framework that focuses on modularity. These latest 3 all look like healthy competitors that are all amicable towards each other
Pumpkin is already on that list.
It's pretty funny how many of these are "Is it a Minecraft server? No. It's a framework with which you can build your own rewrite of Minecraft server."
This got me thinking - is Rust really the right tool for the job? And I thought, Elixir/Erlang feels like the perfect tool. Sure enough, someone did it! Great reference material for someone learning how to do things on the beam https://github.com/thecodeboss/minecraft
I was thinking it would be cool to have a Minecraft server built with Bevy, but that has also already been done: https://github.com/valence-rs/valence
Lmao it is funny how we have daysinceX websites. is there a list of all such websites of daysinceXofY like dayssincelatestframeworkofnode I guess?
omfg haha.
It always fascinates me how people can do this!! Would there be any write ups about how this was made, I'd really appreciate this.
How does this compare to Dragonfly (IIUC, basically the same thing, but in Go)? https://github.com/df-mc/dragonfly
This looks like its for java while dragonfly seems to be for bedrock
Your right
See also https://github.com/valence-rs/valence A "clean room" implementation of the Minecraft server written in Rust
Hi, Valence is a framework (similar to Minestom in Java). You have to build everything you self. Pumpkin is not a framework :D. Also Valence is bit unactive (look commits)
That's why I said "clean room implementation". Any reason why Pumpkin does not build on top of Valence? Would be great to see a more cohesive ecosystem for Minecraft servers in the rust community rather than reinventing the wheel
yes , I was also thinking about this . +1
Just to be clear this sever only works with the current vanilla version of Minecraft? I've been interested in playing again, but on the older Beta builds (1.7.3) prior to the full release versions. These versions aren't supported are they?
This looks great! Can't wait to check out the code in detail.
I would love to hear some feedback, tried my best so code is clean :D
Love the idea. Especially as a learning example. Always fun to learn a language by implementing a popular game.
Am confused by these two lines. Maybe it is just difference between the 'goal' and the 'current state'.
Goal:
"Compatibility: Supports the latest Minecraft server version and adheres to vanilla game mechanics. "
But NOT:
"Be a drop-in replacement for vanilla or other servers "
Will it be a replacement for Vanilla or not?
Compatibility: refers to the ability for client of the latest mincraft server version to be able to connect to the server (pumpkin) unmodified with all mechanics working.
Drop-in replacement: refer to the ability of a server operator to simply exchange the current installation/executable of the server (be vanilla, paper, cuberite, etc...) for pumpkin while maintaining data, configuration, scripts and mods installed.
edit: grammar
Tell you the truth, that doesn't help clarify to me much.
If it is compatible, then can't I 'drop it in'.
They sound like they are saying the same thing.
It is compatible so clients can connect to the server and be fully operational, and thus, I should be able to drop in this server, and use it as a server?
How can it be compatible if it doesn't maintain data, configuration, etc..
Edit: or is this about Pumpkin files. Pumpkin will maintain it's own files, data, configuration. So it can't just use existing Minecraft data files.
So if it was a new world, Pumpkin would generate new pumpkin formatted files. But couldn't just 'drop it in' on an existing world and use the existing Minecraft data files.
Not sure of long term viability as far as effort, but if it is files, couldn't a converter from MineCraft to Pumpkin file structure, make the server 'drop in'?
Maybe some more concrete examples may help:
* nginx is not a drop in replacement for apache
But from a client perspective, both implement HTTP/1.1.
* podman is not a drop in replacement for docker
But from a client perspective connecting to a service hosted in docker, that connection can still occur over TCP.
On the other hand:
* pkgconf is a drop in replacement for pkg-config
* cronie is a drop in replacement for vixie-cron
"But from a client perspective, both implement HTTP/1.1."
This seems too low level example to apply for Minecraft.
Minecraft has a lot going on, back and forth. For something to be 'compatible' it would need to be so detailed an implementation of the server, that it could potentially also be a 'drop in'.
When it comes to game servers, especially for highly modified games like minecraft, there's the client facing side, including how the game behaves, and then there's the server administration side.
If I were to interpret the statement made here I would assume that not-a-drop-in while being vanilla compliant means things like:
* It won't support server side mods without you re-writing them in rust
* It won't support bukkit plugins without you re-writing them in rust
* It doesn't support the configuration file format that the java server uses
* Maybe it doesn't support the world file format (which would be server side only)
* Maybe it doesn't support the same administrative commands (which you would only see as an administrator)
etc.
So it can definitely be compatible from the client perspective while being woefully incompatible with any prior experience anyone running a minecraft server might have.
Drop-in means replacing an existing thing with a new one without changing anything.
This is not compatible with other servers plugins/data/configurations, so just replacing the binary and expecting to continue where you left off is not possible.
I would say that Minecraft servers by some qualities are really hard to implement (for example generate world as Java would - using Java's random number generator to generate exactly the same world in Rust) or even impossible. But other usages, like walking through existing world with 1000 of your colleagues might be worth of writing a very fast but not a "drop in replacement" server. Or a massive minigame maybe?
Hey, There were already efforts made to rewriting the same random generators from Java, And they work. Same seed as in vanilla, Same Result as in vanilla
But the world generation is already deterministic with seeds
It's only deterministic if you feed the seeds into the exact same pseudorandom number generator and fetch random values from it in the exact same order. If you take a single extra random value out of order, then everything ends up different.
Compatible: You start a Pumpkin server, vanilla clients can join and play.
Drop-in: You run a server for some time. You decide to switch the software by replacing the executable. Everything works as before.
"Drop-in" is what enterprise software calls "bug-for-bug compatible" - e.g., replacing RedHat with CentOS (RIP) should work exactly the same, even if the CentOS team found bugs - they report them upstream and do NOT fix them themselves, because code may be relying on the bugs.
This is especially true with complicated vanilla Minecraft setups and red stone machines (Java Minecraft red stone has "bugs" that "shouldn't be there" but cannot be removed now since so much depends on it).
Guess this gets to my other point.
By the time you are 'compatible' then you have implemented everything needed to also be a 'drop-in' but data file formats might need a conversion.
So convert from Minecraft data files to Pumpkin data files. Then it could drop in.
If you need to separately convert files yourself, then it is by definition not drop in
Didn't really mean 'myself'. But if Pumpkin detects an existing world, and does the conversion to their own format. Then it is drop-in.
Even if they supply a tool, isn't it drop-in.
Otherwise I'd so no software in existence is really drop-in. Most of them have some update that has to happen.
Hey, With Compatibility i mean be compatible with existing Minecraft vanilla client's and also use vanilla logic. With "Be a drop-in replacement for vanilla or other servers" i mean that if you just replace the existing server file with pumpkin, pumpkin will not load configs/plugins from vanilla/other servers
> i mean that if you just replace the existing server file with pumpkin, pumpkin will not load configs/plugins from vanilla/other servers
Will it ever though? Is this a goal?
i wish minecraft was open source, i'd be able to fix their inefficient protocol
You should check out minetest. Being renamed to luanti
Downvoter, go check this: https://wiki.vg/Protocol, let me know if that's a good way to sync a lot of fast moving entities across a TCP network
This is why people struggle with their servers, not because the game was written in java
Huh, if this exists and there’s already so many servers, maybe I should build a client instead.
Curious what protocol you would use, or how you would do it differently? Are there small enhancements to the existing protocol you would do? Genuine open question for the sake of learning.
I would prefer the UDP Protocol over TCP like in Bedrock edition. Im pretty sure many PVP players would love this. Here is much non sense in the Minecraft protocol and things made to work not to be optimized (deadlines). At our discord we even already have a sticker :mojang_nonsense: which will be used quiet often. I also don't understand Mojang's tactic with packet changes, It sometimes looks like they care about Packets not being broken and being backwards compatible but them sometimes they change the whole Networking system (1.20)
Basically any significant Java software uses disproportionate amounts of RAM. My server can easily run a web server, database server, ftp server, memory cache, etc., times a few copies because various containers have their own web server or whatnot, all at the same time. But a single copy of Minecraft is too much, even when everything else is shut down.
That's why I struggle with the server: it's written in Java. Other game servers don't seem to have this problem. If the network protocol were all, that'd be great
(I didn't downvote any of your posts in case you now wonder if that was me)
looks good
thank you :3
Reminded me of this existing https://dayssincelastrustmcserver.com/
[flagged]
Similar projects:
- Feather (Rust, abandoned) https://github.com/feather-rs/feather
- Valence (Rust) https://github.com/valence-rs/valence
- Cuberite (C++) https://github.com/cuberite/cuberite
Valence:
> A Rust framework for building Minecraft: Java Edition servers.
Through there are currently 3 new rust impl. differentiating themself from Valence. So it's interesting to see how this will develop long term. Like will they be for different use case(1)? Will they merge? Will some die and developers migrate?
(1): There are actually quite a lot of different use cases, i.e. Java Edition is by now mostly about mods so providing different modding capabilities and various "common mods build-in" and similar can be a big target. But so can be wanting to run a mostly vanilla community MC server for quite a bunch of people etc.
Minecraft Server (Zig) https://github.com/regenerativep/zig-mc-server
[dead]
this person is going gods work
This weeks Minecraft server! Nice!