Picking up on this mish-mash of 4.45-issues I have some queries.
Currently, I'm running two BOINC-clients, one native in Linux (4.43), and one wine-ing (4.19). The fact I'm wine-ing one is becauset hat one is about twice as fast as the native Linux-one. Why I'm not wine-ing both is because the less I have to use a window$ program, the happier I am). When they were both native Linux E@H was constantly flirting with the deadline, since my pc is not on 24/24, 7/7, but only about as long as it took to get one E@H WU done, and since I was also crunching S@H-WU's, that was a serious problem. However, with this new deadline-feature, once it's all settled, I think that would mean once BOINC has figured my situation out, it will give E@H full priority until its WU has been crunched (hopefully in time), and then swtich over to S@H to compensate for the LT-debt. Is that assumption correct and does anybody have any idea whether they've optimized compiling the new BOINC-version for Linux yet, so the difference in speed isn't that big anymore (preferable by upping the BOINC/Linux-speed)?
Picking up on this mish-mash of 4.45-issues I have some queries.
Currently, I'm running two BOINC-clients, one native in Linux (4.43), and one wine-ing (4.19). The fact I'm wine-ing one is becauset hat one is about twice as fast as the native Linux-one. Why I'm not wine-ing both is because the less I have to use a window$ program, the happier I am). When they were both native Linux E@H was constantly flirting with the deadline, since my pc is not on 24/24, 7/7, but only about as long as it took to get one E@H WU done, and since I was also crunching S@H-WU's, that was a serious problem. However, with this new deadline-feature, once it's all settled, I think that would mean once BOINC has figured my situation out, it will give E@H full priority until its WU has been crunched (hopefully in time), and then swtich over to S@H to compensate for the LT-debt. Is that assumption correct and does anybody have any idea whether they've optimized compiling the new BOINC-version for Linux yet, so the difference in speed isn't that big anymore (preferable by upping the BOINC/Linux-speed)?
Your assumption is how it works with a couple of details that may surprise some people. Einstein may load in the middle of a S@H WU and then take over until it is done because of the short deadline, and then you may get several S@H WUs done before the next Einstein WU downloads.
The cutoff for downloading work is -conenect every X. The reason for this is that if none of the projects that you are attached to needs EDF, then all projects will have an LT debt greater than -connect every X.
Just one short question. BOINC 4.43 for Linux seems to have these same features as 4.45 for Windows does. New CPU scheduler policy, deadline policy, work fetch policy, all new. Anyway, I wonder which policy has priority over the other concerning deadline policy and the LT-debt policy. You see, BOINC was happy crunching away on a E@H-WU, under the deadline policy, and then suddenly S@H chimed back in with the LT-debt policy.
Picking up on this mish-mash
)
Picking up on this mish-mash of 4.45-issues I have some queries.
Currently, I'm running two BOINC-clients, one native in Linux (4.43), and one wine-ing (4.19). The fact I'm wine-ing one is becauset hat one is about twice as fast as the native Linux-one. Why I'm not wine-ing both is because the less I have to use a window$ program, the happier I am). When they were both native Linux E@H was constantly flirting with the deadline, since my pc is not on 24/24, 7/7, but only about as long as it took to get one E@H WU done, and since I was also crunching S@H-WU's, that was a serious problem. However, with this new deadline-feature, once it's all settled, I think that would mean once BOINC has figured my situation out, it will give E@H full priority until its WU has been crunched (hopefully in time), and then swtich over to S@H to compensate for the LT-debt. Is that assumption correct and does anybody have any idea whether they've optimized compiling the new BOINC-version for Linux yet, so the difference in speed isn't that big anymore (preferable by upping the BOINC/Linux-speed)?
RE: Picking up on this
)
Your assumption is how it works with a couple of details that may surprise some people. Einstein may load in the middle of a S@H WU and then take over until it is done because of the short deadline, and then you may get several S@H WUs done before the next Einstein WU downloads.
The cutoff for downloading work is -conenect every X. The reason for this is that if none of the projects that you are attached to needs EDF, then all projects will have an LT debt greater than -connect every X.
BOINC WIKI
Just one short question.
)
Just one short question. BOINC 4.43 for Linux seems to have these same features as 4.45 for Windows does. New CPU scheduler policy, deadline policy, work fetch policy, all new. Anyway, I wonder which policy has priority over the other concerning deadline policy and the LT-debt policy. You see, BOINC was happy crunching away on a E@H-WU, under the deadline policy, and then suddenly S@H chimed back in with the LT-debt policy.