FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Release)

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Rattledagger » Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:26 am

Nice new homepage, this makes it very easy to steer new users to the download-link...

...but, after hitting the download-link, after some seconds or minutes (depending on download-speed), you've greeted with this message:
fah-installer_7.1.52_x86.exe is not commonly downloaded and could harm your computer.

The obvious choise for most users is to hit "Delete", and you've just lost a possible new FAH-user.

For the few users adventurous enough to not immediately hit "Delete", they've greeted with:
This program might harm your computer

SmartScreen Filter has little or no information about this unsigned program. Running this program might harm your computer.

Name: fah-installer_7.1.52_x86.exe
Publisher: Unknown

(The colouring red is by me)

There's also the options:
Don't run this program

Delete program

More Options

An unsigned program is in my opinion a fatal bug, since most new potential users won't install it at all.
Rattledagger
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: Norway

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Jesse_V » Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:57 am

Rattledagger wrote:Nice new homepage, this makes it very easy to steer new users to the download-link...

...but, after hitting the download-link, after some seconds or minutes (depending on download-speed), you've greeted with this message:
...


I agree that those issues could be a deterrent. What anti-virus/etc do you have installed? Is that Norton? I went the page, downloaded it, and all that I saw before the install screen was the standard Win7 message saying "Do you want to allow the following program from an unknown publisher make changes to your computer?" So I didn't see your messages, but considering all the security measures and whatnot that go into F@h software and rules that prevent downloads from mirrors, I'm thinking that the publisher should be specified in the program somehow. No idea how that's done though, but just wanted to add my support for it.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
 
Posts: 2846
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:44 am
Location: Western Washington

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Rattledagger » Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:19 am

Jesse_V wrote:I agree that those issues could be a deterrent. What anti-virus/etc do you have installed? Is that Norton? I went the page, downloaded it, and all that I saw before the install screen was the standard Win7 message saying "Do you want to allow the following program from an unknown publisher make changes to your computer?" So I didn't see your messages, but considering all the security measures and whatnot that go into F@h software and rules that prevent downloads from mirrors, I'm thinking that the publisher should be specified in the program somehow. No idea how that's done though, but just wanted to add my support for it.

It was IE-9 that gave the messages, not any anti-virus-scanners or similar. If clicks on the downloaded file outside of IE it's the "Unknown publisher" courtesy of win7 that pops-up.
Rattledagger
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 10:48 pm
Location: Norway

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby GreyWhiskers » Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:11 am

I got the same messages from the Norton Suite that is provided by my Internet provider, Comcast. Initially, I also got the message that this file was very new and had very few Norton users - which was true on Day 1. It was easy to "trust" the download, but I agree that new users could get spooked.
User avatar
GreyWhiskers
 
Posts: 660
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:57 am
Location: Saratoga, California USA

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Neptunus » Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:52 pm

Whereas FAHClient V6.23 commandeered about 25% of my CPU usage, leaving adequate cycles for other applications, V7 commandeers 100% of the available CPU cores and then gracefully drops back as other applications require CPU usage. This works fine, but it does mean that all CPU cores are running at 100% all of the time. The upshot of running the CPU cores at 100% continually is that cooling fans are also running flat-out continually. This will be no problem in many workplace environments but is unacceptable (at least to me) in a quiet home/office environment. I have uninstalled the V7 client and gone back to V6.23. Of course the speed of dealing with WUs is much slower than with V7, when the CPU was running flat out. I would suggest that a modification of the V7 client to allow the client user to limit the usage of CPU cores to 50%, 75% or 100% as desired would be more acceptable to many users.
Neptunus
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:37 pm

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Sailer » Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:28 pm

I have two more questions concerning the SR-2 that I set up a few days ago.

The first is probably the easiest. It was mentioned that I should delete the GPU part of the client as its not getting used. How do I do that? I don't want to cause problems concerning WUs.

Second, so far I'm only getting A3 WUs, and the PPD has dropped to about 58k even using the bonus calculator ( http://www.linuxforge.net/bonuscalc2.php ). That seems rather low, especially with 24 cores running 100%. But beyond that, even though my other computers using V7 all get either A4 or A5 WUs, the SR-2 so far has only been assigned A3s. Is there a reason for this or is it just random chance?
Sailer
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:55 am

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby bruce » Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:26 am

Neptunus wrote:Whereas FAHClient V6.23 commandeered about 25% of my CPU usage, leaving adequate cycles for other applications, V7 commandeers 100% of the available CPU cores and then gracefully drops back as other applications require CPU usage. This works fine, but it does mean that all CPU cores are running at 100% all of the time. The upshot of running the CPU cores at 100% continually is that cooling fans are also running flat-out continually. This will be no problem in many workplace environments but is unacceptable (at least to me) in a quiet home/office environment. I have uninstalled the V7 client and gone back to V6.23. Of course the speed of dealing with WUs is much slower than with V7, when the CPU was running flat out. I would suggest that a modification of the V7 client to allow the client user to limit the usage of CPU cores to 50%, 75% or 100% as desired would be more acceptable to many users.


Welcome to foldingforum.org, Neptunus.

You're confusing the default settings for V6 and V7 with the results of the choices that you can make.

V6 defaults to the Uniprocessor configuration, which makes use of only one of your CPU cores. V7 defaults to a SMP configuration which makes full use of all four of your processors. The same choices exist for either V6 or V7. As you've already noted, there is virtually no difference in responsiveness of foreground tasks, but the heat generated is quite different.

When you installed V7, two of your choices were Uniprocessor or SMP. When you installed V6, you also had that same choice, but you may not have realized it. For your quad processor, you actually have four choices: Use 25%, 50%, 75% or 100% of your CPU. The speed of processing the WUs and heat generated will be identical whether you use V6 or V7 provided you make the same choice.

I can understand your concern for fan-noise. Let me suggest you try 2 or 3 cores rather than 1 (your V6 choice) or 4 (your V7 choice), and decide what works best for you. If V7 is still installed, you can go to Configure + Slots and edit the SMP slot, changing the number of threads from 4 to 3. If V6 is installed, add the -smp 3 command-line flag. If that's still not acceptable, you can replace 3 with 2 and see if the sound is still unacceptable. If you really need to be at 25%, in V6 you can remove the -smp flag entirely, and in V7 you'll have to delete the smp slot and add a uniprocessor slot (or reinstall, specifying uniproessor rather than the default of SMP+GPU.)
bruce
 
Posts: 19399
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Joe_H » Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:48 am

Sailer wrote:I have two more questions concerning the SR-2 that I set up a few days ago.

The first is probably the easiest. It was mentioned that I should delete the GPU part of the client as its not getting used. How do I do that? I don't want to cause problems concerning WUs.


The first article in this thread has links to documentation, you need the one for FAHControl - https://fah-web.stanford.edu/projects/F ... FahControl. Under the entry for Configure, the Slots tab will list your slots that have been set up. Highlight the one for the GPU slot, and click on Remove. Then Save the changed configuration. That should take care of removing the GPU slot and will also remove any WU for that slot.

Second, so far I'm only getting A3 WUs, and the PPD has dropped to about 58k even using the bonus calculator ( http://www.linuxforge.net/bonuscalc2.php ). That seems rather low, especially with 24 cores running 100%. But beyond that, even though my other computers using V7 all get either A4 or A5 WUs, the SR-2 so far has only been assigned A3s. Is there a reason for this or is it just random chance?


There is a limited number of bigadv WU's currently available, and as I understand it even fewer for running under Windows. There are some projects in beta testing, those should eventually become available. That beta testing is separate from this beta of the folding client. So getting bigadv is chance at this point. As to why just A3 so far, someone who understands the flags better might comment on them after looking at the System portion of your log in the previous post.

One thing that can be reducing your PPD is your setting of the next-unit-percentage flag for SMP to 95% Unless you have a very slow internet connection, the default value of 99% is plenty of time to get another WU before the current one completes. 100% also works for a moderate speed, I have that set on my systems connected by 6 Mbps DSL and the WU downloads before the previous WU is even ready to be uploaded. The WU sitting on your system for 20-30 minutes does reduce the bonus as it is computed from initial download, not when processing starts.

Another thing that reduces PPD is the specific projects you get work from. They try to keep the points award consistent across projects, but there is variance. Plus or minus 10% is the range they try to keep within, some are outside that.

P.S. The WU listed in the log from your earlier post was a core A4, so your SR-2 folder has received at least one non-A3 WU.
Last edited by Joe_H on Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
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: 6332
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby bollix47 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 2:03 am

If you're trying to get bigadv you need the following options set:

client-type bigadv
max-packet-size big
bollix47
 
Posts: 2861
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 6:04 am
Location: Canada

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby jsfitz54 » Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:01 am

7im wrote:Software version did not change the fahcores, and the fahcore is what runs on the GPU. So v.52 did not change anything there. If you are seeing higher temps, it's because you received work units that run hotter, i.e. using more of your computing resources, folding more for science. Er, folding less, now that you shut it off. ;)

No attempt to reduce the CPU usage to slow down the client, thus reducing temps? :(



Hi 7im,

No, reducing cpu usage did not work in either of my 2 full time folders at reducing GPU temps. It also did not work in my test box on Windows 8 Preview.

Today, I tried a SMP slot again on my desktop unit, it was working ok and hit 60c and seemed to be working smoothly. (fan control with new EVGA PrecisionX) I left the house when it was about half completed (6 hour unit) and when I returned the computer had recovered from a BSOD. (running in Advanced mode) I had set the unit to finish. I eliminated the slot.

Machines run stable, the desktop is in a CoolerMaster Stacker 830 case and has plenty of air flow.

All my hardware is decent and I run very conservative overclocks.

Any truth to changing client fields, Novice, Advanced, Expert to reduce temps?

Is there an Nvida driver issue with the new 296.10 or (W8) 296.17? Are certain drivers recommended at this time?

I still feel strongly that one should be able to set GPU slots by percentage. I think this would help retain donors.
jsfitz54
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 5:51 pm

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Calvin_Li » Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:07 am

Hi,

I've tried running FAHViewer on Ubuntu 12.04b1 but keep getting this error:

Code: Select all
FAHViewer: error while loading shared libraries: libGLEW.so.1.7: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory


There is no libglew1.7 on Ubuntu; the latest in the repositories is 1.6.
Last edited by Calvin_Li on Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:32 am, edited 2 times in total.
Calvin_Li
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:55 am

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby bruce » Mon Mar 26, 2012 6:12 am

jsfitz54 wrote:I still feel strongly that one should be able to set GPU slots by percentage. I think this would help retain donors.


Everyone agrees with you on that point ... but Development is actively working on making that possible in a future version of the FahCores, and they're not there yet. Griping about it won't make them able to fix the software any faster than they already hope to be able to.
bruce
 
Posts: 19399
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: So. Cal.

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby P5-133XL » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:18 am

I just had FAHControl v7.1.52 freeze for no reason. I right clicked on a local GPU slot (with the intention of pausing it) and it started to draw a small window (but didn't complete). The task manager sees FAHControl using 25% (a full core). It won't let me kill or shrink FAHControl or do anything with it. The cores seem to be folding normally. The computer is operating normally, other than the FAHControl.

I'm going to use the task manager to kill the process, but I thought I'd report the problem.

This is what the end of the log file currently looks like:

Code: Select all
******************************** Date: 29/03/12 ********************************
08:29:48:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   8000000 out of 25000000 steps (32%).
08:32:23:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  17250000 out of 25000000 steps (69%).
08:33:07:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 3600000 out of 10000000 steps  (36%)
08:33:39:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   8250000 out of 25000000 steps (33%).
08:36:12:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  17500000 out of 25000000 steps (70%).
08:37:20:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 3700000 out of 10000000 steps  (37%)
08:37:31:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   8500000 out of 25000000 steps (34%).
08:40:00:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  17750000 out of 25000000 steps (71%).
08:41:23:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   8750000 out of 25000000 steps (35%).
08:43:12:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 3800000 out of 10000000 steps  (38%)
08:43:49:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  18000000 out of 25000000 steps (72%).
08:45:14:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   9000000 out of 25000000 steps (36%).
08:47:37:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  18250000 out of 25000000 steps (73%).
08:47:55:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 3900000 out of 10000000 steps  (39%)
08:49:06:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   9250000 out of 25000000 steps (37%).
08:51:26:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  18500000 out of 25000000 steps (74%).
08:53:00:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   9500000 out of 25000000 steps (38%).
08:54:22:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 4000000 out of 10000000 steps  (40%)
08:55:14:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  18750000 out of 25000000 steps (75%).
08:56:52:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed   9750000 out of 25000000 steps (39%).
08:58:29:WU01:FS02:0xa4:Completed 4100000 out of 10000000 steps  (41%)
08:59:03:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  19000000 out of 25000000 steps (76%).
09:00:42:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed  10000000 out of 25000000 steps (40%).
09:02:51:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  19250000 out of 25000000 steps (77%).
09:03:43:Server connection id=30 ended
09:04:32:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed  10250000 out of 25000000 steps (41%).
09:06:39:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  19500000 out of 25000000 steps (78%).
09:08:21:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed  10500000 out of 25000000 steps (42%).
09:10:29:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  19750000 out of 25000000 steps (79%).
09:12:11:WU02:FS00:0x15:Completed  10750000 out of 25000000 steps (43%).
09:14:18:WU03:FS01:0x15:Completed  20000000 out of 25000000 steps (80%).


The lockup roughly corresponds to the "09:03:43:Server connection id=30 ended" about 20 minutes ago.
Image
P5-133XL
 
Posts: 2948
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 5:36 am
Location: Salem. OR USA

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Miller855 » Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:17 pm

Hello, i am not sure where to post this....
A couple days ago, i had trouble with a specific wu, i went to that forum, saw someone else with the same problem
the wu was interupted, it would go back to ready status after starting to run.
it was suggested that the user download the newest beta version 7.1.52

I did that and it fixed That problem i had to pause then close FAHControl 7.1.38 to install 7.1.52
the wu started as annonymous i filled in my name and team# but forgot my passkey
so the last two days my points are way down.
Today, When I tried to enter the passkey it WOULD NOT let me copy & paste it in, i had to type each digit manually
on both iMacs.
Is this Intentional?
if so Why?
with previous versions i could just use Command C & Command V to copy and paste my Passkey
an Intel i5 6400 2.70 Ghz 8 Gig ram windows 10 home, burnt out the 975GTX card here in march 2018
iMac 2.0 Ghz, C2D 2Gb DDR2 Ram, OSX 10.11.6 (El Capitan), Built in ATI Raedon HD 2400
Miller855
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Phila (Suburbs) PA USA

Re: FAHClient V7.1.52 released (1st Public-Beta)

Postby Joe_H » Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:34 pm

Miller855 wrote:Today, When I tried to enter the passkey it WOULD NOT let me copy & paste it in, i had to type each digit manually
on both iMacs.
Is this Intentional?
if so Why?
with previous versions i could just use Command C & Command V to copy and paste my Passkey


As far as I know, Command-C and Command-V have never worked as copy and paste in FAHControl on OS X, and there is an open ticket on that. The Linux and Windows style Control-C, Control-V and Control-A key combos work as cut, paste and select all.

Coming from a background where I have used both standards for years, I do remember to shift my thinking in FAHControl after using the wrong key combo first. First association is, using OS X so go for the Command key. Use anything else, use the Control key. Hopefully they get the key bindings corrected for OS X eventually.
Last edited by Joe_H on Thu Mar 29, 2012 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Joe_H
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6332
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 pm
Location: W. MA

PreviousNext

Return to V7.1.52 Windows/Linux

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 1 guest

cron