Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby 7im » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:24 pm

pgwalsh wrote:Great thread!

FAHControl V7.1.43 is reporting my Core i7 2600 as OS Arch AMD64. I'm on OS X Hackintosh system and was wondering what the proper setting should be. Is it X86, like on my Mac Pro 3,1 or is something else with a 64 designation. Does it matter?

Also. I can only set client-type to bigadv or advanced, but not both. I'm gathering this is normal? I also have max-packet-size set to big, but not sure if it's necessary with bidadv flag.

Peter

64 bit designation, but doesn't matter.

Not both is normal, either or. You can only request normal sized advanced work units, or big sized advanced work units.

big WU size setting is good practice when using bigadv. Can't always count on the assignment servers to be perfectly setup.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
User avatar
7im
 
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:30 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby Joe_H » Mon Feb 06, 2012 6:32 pm

No point in setting to bigadv, there are none for OS X. Bigadv requires core A5, that has only been publicly released for Linux and Windows. I don't recall even seeing a beta release of A5 for OS X mentioned.
Image

iMac 2.8 i7 12 GB smp8, Mac Pro 2.8 quad 12 GB smp6
MacBook Pro 2.9 i7 8 GB smp3
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6682
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby pgwalsh » Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:55 pm

Thank you both. Good things to know.

Is that 64 bit designation X8664 or X86-64?
User avatar
pgwalsh
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby 7im » Mon Feb 06, 2012 11:29 pm

AMD-64, alternately, x86-64.

AMD had 64 bit CPUs on the market before Intel. The rule is, you invent it, you get to name it. So the AMD-64 stuck, even though everyone is building to the x86 spec. ;)
User avatar
7im
 
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:30 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby codysluder » Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:40 am

It does not matter. The old 32 bit hardware from both Intel and AMD was called x86. The newer 64 bit hardware from both Intel and AMD is called AMD64 (since Intel licenses the instruction set from AMD). At one point in time, Intel designed a 64 bit architecture called IA-64 or Itanium, but it had problems and never caught on so they started selling AMD64 chips though they sometimes go under other designations.

IA-64 was not backwards compatible with 32-bit x84 code. AMD64 is.
codysluder
 
Posts: 1022
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:43 pm

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby GreyWhiskers » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:18 am

User avatar
GreyWhiskers
 
Posts: 660
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:57 am
Location: Saratoga, California USA

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby Foxone » Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:50 pm

In os X with client v7 I am able to add a GPU but it is unable to connect to grab a WU.
Work server and collection servers stay at 0.0.0.0

is this a known issue with the OS X client?
Foxone
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:46 pm

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby jimerickson » Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:11 pm

gpu folding on osx is not supported.
jimerickson
 
Posts: 533
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 12:56 am
Location: ames, iowa

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby kscott » Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:23 am

Why is it so difficult for you guys to just add these optional check boxes instead of us having to type them in?
Wouldn't that just make this program so much easier to use?
kscott
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:59 am

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby Jesse_V » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:37 am

kscott wrote:Why is it so difficult for you guys to just add these optional check boxes instead of us having to type them in?
Wouldn't that just make this program so much easier to use?

I don't think it's a matter of implementation difficulty. I'll agree that it would make the program easier to use. However, if you use checkboxes, people who don't know what they're doing will check one or all of them out of curiosity, and end up doing more harm to the project than good. The flags make it more difficult for people to apply a flag that they know what it does, but it keeps people from frivolously doing something to their client that they wouldn't normally want. I guess the PG decided that it's better to keep with flags (since they've been using them already for v6) so that's how it came out. Personally, I would have implemented checkboxes and copious amounts of warning messages, but I don't have any experience with how curious and rash people are about such things. I guess it's a balance. Now that you know a little bit about why they used flags instead of checkboxes, how could practically do better here in your opinion?
F@h is now the top computing platform on the planet and nothing unites people like a dedicated fight against a common enemy. This virus affects all of us. Lets end it together.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:44 am
Location: Western Washington

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby 7im » Sun Apr 29, 2012 2:52 am

Kscott, which options in particular?
User avatar
7im
 
Posts: 10189
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 5:30 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby kscott » Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:42 am

Jesse_V wrote:
kscott wrote:Why is it so difficult for you guys to just add these optional check boxes instead of us having to type them in?
Wouldn't that just make this program so much easier to use?

I don't think it's a matter of implementation difficulty. I'll agree that it would make the program easier to use. However, if you use checkboxes, people who don't know what they're doing will check one or all of them out of curiosity, and end up doing more harm to the project than good. The flags make it more difficult for people to apply a flag that they know what it does, but it keeps people from frivolously doing something to their client that they wouldn't normally want. I guess the PG decided that it's better to keep with flags (since they've been using them already for v6) so that's how it came out. Personally, I would have implemented checkboxes and copious amounts of warning messages, but I don't have any experience with how curious and rash people are about such things. I guess it's a balance. Now that you know a little bit about why they used flags instead of checkboxes, how could practically do better here in your opinion?


Have a failsafe
I've seen programs that won't let you check multiple boxes that conflict with each other
I don't see why something like that can't be included
kscott
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:59 am

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby Jesse_V » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:07 am

kscott wrote:
Jesse_V wrote:
kscott wrote:Why is it so difficult for you guys to just add these optional check boxes instead of us having to type them in?
Wouldn't that just make this program so much easier to use?

I don't think it's a matter of implementation difficulty. I'll agree that it would make the program easier to use. However, if you use checkboxes, people who don't know what they're doing will check one or all of them out of curiosity, and end up doing more harm to the project than good. The flags make it more difficult for people to apply a flag that they know what it does, but it keeps people from frivolously doing something to their client that they wouldn't normally want. I guess the PG decided that it's better to keep with flags (since they've been using them already for v6) so that's how it came out. Personally, I would have implemented checkboxes and copious amounts of warning messages, but I don't have any experience with how curious and rash people are about such things. I guess it's a balance. Now that you know a little bit about why they used flags instead of checkboxes, how could practically do better here in your opinion?


Have a failsafe
I've seen programs that won't let you check multiple boxes that conflict with each other
I don't see why something like that can't be included

I think there's more to it than that. There are some flags that you would only add if you knew exactly what you were doing. For example, I'm on the Beta Team and the flag that we use for testing newly-minted WUs normally runs all fine and dandy until this morning when one of Dr. Bowman's latest project caused so many errors that my GPU slot shut itself down until I addressed the issue. If I wasn't carefully watching things, that could be unproductive for the project, and there are plenty of other things that can happen. The point is, nobody knows the flags until they read a description on some forum or read the documentation, so this way they are fairly unlikely to inappropriately configure it. Checkboxes make things easier for people like us to configure it, but have the disadvantage that newbs can mess things up if they aren't careful.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:44 am
Location: Western Washington

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby bruce » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:46 am

When you change the configuration and then restart the client, you expect that client to "remember" the change. Right? That means the settings have to be stored in a config file somewhere.

Steps:
1) Define software than will implement a desirable feature.
2) Define a way to store that setting in the config file.
3) Revise the FahControl to add a check-box for that feature.

Which is more economical in terms of programming time: Steps 1 and 2 or steps 1, 2, and 3?

Yes, a checkbox would be more convenient, but in my experience, almost all of the settings are configured only once and then rarely changed after that. I'd call the checkboxes "bells and whistles" rather than essential features. Building another page with all the checkboxes would be way, way down on the priority list of things I'd like to see added to the client. I recommend that we concentrate on the things that would make a difference on a regular basis and leave out the parts that would only rarely be a minor inconvenience.
bruce
 
Posts: 20140
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: Slot Options For V7 (Pictorial Guide)

Postby Stonecold » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:59 am

Maybe it could be set so that check boxes are only used in "Expert" mode, or do to many people just use Expert mode anyway?
Stonecold
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 10:20 pm

PreviousNext

Return to V7.1.52 Windows/Linux

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron