OK, thanks very much for that. Looks like 4.35 is doing a very reasonable job by all accounts. I'll probably start upgrading some boxes to 4.35 shortly.
OK, thanks very much for that. Looks like 4.35 is doing a very reasonable job by all accounts. I'll probably start upgrading some boxes to 4.35 shortly.
Thanks.
Just upgraded again to v4.37. Not sure yet, but I think the sheduling code might be a bit buggy. We'll have to see how things work out.
I'd mentioned earlier about going to 4.35. Before I got the chance, 4.36 came out so I upgraded 7 boxes to 4.36. I've had no problems that I've noticed. It's running as a service when the user is idle for 0.5 minutes or not logged it. Seems to be working just fine. The user is unaware that E@H or BOINC are running.
I'd mentioned earlier about going to 4.35. Before I got the chance, 4.36 came out so I upgraded 7 boxes to 4.36. I've had no problems that I've noticed. It's running as a service when the user is idle for 0.5 minutes or not logged it. Seems to be working just fine. The user is unaware that E@H or BOINC are running.
So, in what way is 4.37 better than 4.36?It has more changes to the client side work scheduler. It also seems to work less well for many people.
John has added fixes for some of the odd results seen with the new scheduler, but in some cases these changes made things worse for people. You can see more detailed discussion over in the SETI@Home forum.
Which does not answer *MY* question. Is the Macintosh 4.37 compiled against the same source files as the Windows 4.37 soruce files, or the ones current as of now? :)
CC v4.38 has now been made available, which seems to have fixed this "hard loop" bug... For me at any rate. I presume that's what you lot were talking about.
The scheduler runs a bit better, and it's less inclined to give you additional WUs from the projects with long deadlines. (such as CPDN which run for several hundred hours, as well as the ROC projects that run for a year) Note that I said less inclined, as people were still reporting additional WUs with 4.37.
Now that 4.38 is out, we'll see if it's changed for the better. :)
In follow-up to questions 1 &
)
In follow-up to questions 1 & 4 Gary...
OK, thanks very much for that. Looks like 4.35 is doing a very reasonable job by all accounts. I'll probably start upgrading some boxes to 4.35 shortly.
Thanks.
Cheers,
Gary.
So dose this mean 4.35 will
)
So dose this mean 4.35 will hurry up and finish a WU, upload the WU, but not report the WU.
Good news.
All i did is enable network access and BOINC did the rest. Upload and report.
5/2/05 9:48:05 PM||Resuming network activity
5/2/05 9:48:06 PM|Einstein@Home|Started upload of
H1_1457.4__1457.8_0.1_T14_Run2_3_0
5/2/05 9:48:22 PM|Einstein@Home|Finished upload of H1_1457.4__1457.8_0.1_T14_Run2_3_0
5/2/05 9:48:22 PM|Einstein@Home|Throughput 3372 bytes/sec
5/2/05 9:48:23 PM|Einstein@Home|Sending request to scheduler: http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/EinsteinAtHome_cgi/cgi
5/2/05 9:48:25 PM|Einstein@Home|Scheduler RPC to http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/EinsteinAtHome_cgi/cgi succeeded
In follow-up to questions 1 &
)
In follow-up to questions 1 & 4 Gary...
OK, thanks very much for that. Looks like 4.35 is doing a very reasonable job by all accounts. I'll probably start upgrading some boxes to 4.35 shortly.
Thanks.
Just upgraded again to v4.37. Not sure yet, but I think the sheduling code might be a bit buggy. We'll have to see how things work out.
Just upgraded again to v4.37.
)
Just upgraded again to v4.37. Not sure yet, but I think the sheduling code might be a bit buggy. We'll have to see how things work out.
It's running better than 4.36.
It's running better than
)
It's running better than 4.36.
I'd mentioned earlier about going to 4.35. Before I got the chance, 4.36 came out so I upgraded 7 boxes to 4.36. I've had no problems that I've noticed. It's running as a service when the user is idle for 0.5 minutes or not logged it. Seems to be working just fine. The user is unaware that E@H or BOINC are running.
So, in what way is 4.37 better than 4.36?
Cheers,
Gary.
It's running better than
)
It's running better than 4.36.
I'd mentioned earlier about going to 4.35. Before I got the chance, 4.36 came out so I upgraded 7 boxes to 4.36. I've had no problems that I've noticed. It's running as a service when the user is idle for 0.5 minutes or not logged it. Seems to be working just fine. The user is unaware that E@H or BOINC are running.
So, in what way is 4.37 better than 4.36?It has more changes to the client side work scheduler. It also seems to work less well for many people.
John has added fixes for some of the odd results seen with the new scheduler, but in some cases these changes made things worse for people. You can see more detailed discussion over in the SETI@Home forum.
Which does not answer *MY* question. Is the Macintosh 4.37 compiled against the same source files as the Windows 4.37 soruce files, or the ones current as of now? :)
CC v4.38 has now been made
)
CC v4.38 has now been made available, which seems to have fixed this "hard loop" bug... For me at any rate. I presume that's what you lot were talking about.
So, in what way is 4.37
)
So, in what way is 4.37 better than 4.36?
The scheduler runs a bit better, and it's less inclined to give you additional WUs from the projects with long deadlines. (such as CPDN which run for several hundred hours, as well as the ROC projects that run for a year) Note that I said less inclined, as people were still reporting additional WUs with 4.37.
Now that 4.38 is out, we'll see if it's changed for the better. :)