- Welcome to eFMer - BoincTasks and TThrottle forum.
eFMer - BoincTasks and TThrottle forum
News:
Follow BoincTasks on Twitter
Facebook Visit our website here.
BoincTasks cloud login is working again
Recent posts
#11
Questions / Re: BoincTasks JS beta 2.0 rel...
Last post by fred - September 18, 2023, 12:19:55 PM2.1 should resolve most problems.
The header width adjust is still open. https://github.com/efmer/boinctasks-js/issues
Tip: To adjust the header, make all other rows smaller.
The header width adjust is still open. https://github.com/efmer/boinctasks-js/issues
Tip: To adjust the header, make all other rows smaller.
#12
Beta Testing / Re: CPU% wrong for fractional ...
Last post by hucker - September 14, 2023, 11:00:48 PMI've just experimented by changing <avg_ncpus> on the fly. It's rounding it up to the next whole number. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 all work fine. 0.8 gives the same percentage as 1. 1.1 gives the same percentage as 2.
However it does work for scheduling. If I change 1 to 0.9 on a 24 core machine, it runs 27 tasks instead of 24.
I'd assumed the task itself reported a time, and Boinc or Boinctasks divided the processing time by the wall time. So you're saying Boinc or Boinctasks receives a % from the OS (like you see in task manager), and uses that along with the time the task has run for, to calculate the processing time? Something somewhere (not in the OS) must be then dividing by the number of cores in avg_ncpus, but it's using an integer and assumed nobody would ever set fractional cores. Under 1 core is odd I admit, but it's feasible to set say 6.5 cores in an 8 core task which uses an average below what it's capable of.
However it does work for scheduling. If I change 1 to 0.9 on a 24 core machine, it runs 27 tasks instead of 24.
I'd assumed the task itself reported a time, and Boinc or Boinctasks divided the processing time by the wall time. So you're saying Boinc or Boinctasks receives a % from the OS (like you see in task manager), and uses that along with the time the task has run for, to calculate the processing time? Something somewhere (not in the OS) must be then dividing by the number of cores in avg_ncpus, but it's using an integer and assumed nobody would ever set fractional cores. Under 1 core is odd I admit, but it's feasible to set say 6.5 cores in an 8 core task which uses an average below what it's capable of.
#13
Beta Testing / Re: CPU% wrong for fractional ...
Last post by fred - September 14, 2023, 12:55:52 PMI wonder if <avg_ncpus>0.7</avg_ncpus> does anything besides showing on the screen.
BoincTasks shows the actual run % reported by the OS to the Boinc Client -> BoincTasks.
70 min out of 100 min = 70% 100 min out of 100 min = 100%.
0.7 = expected run time 70%.
BoincTasks shows the actual run % reported by the OS to the Boinc Client -> BoincTasks.
70 min out of 100 min = 70% 100 min out of 100 min = 100%.
0.7 = expected run time 70%.
#14
Beta Testing / Re: CPU% wrong for fractional ...
Last post by hucker - September 14, 2023, 07:34:16 AMThe 0.7C was me using an app_config:
This may seem an odd thing to do, but Theory on LHC downloads massive amounts of data, an d often the CPU is held up waiting, so I run more tasks than I have CPU threads.
If I have set 0.7C, and the times are showing say 70min out of 100min, that ought to show as 100%.
Code Select
<app_version>
<app_name>Theory</app_name>
<plan_class>vbox64_theory</plan_class>
<avg_ncpus>0.7</avg_ncpus>
</app_version>This may seem an odd thing to do, but Theory on LHC downloads massive amounts of data, an d often the CPU is held up waiting, so I run more tasks than I have CPU threads.
If I have set 0.7C, and the times are showing say 70min out of 100min, that ought to show as 100%.
#15
Beta Testing / Re: CPU% wrong for fractional ...
Last post by fred - September 14, 2023, 06:14:04 AMThe CPU calculates these numbers. 0.7C is just an estimate and the real fraction may be something else.
#16
Beta Testing / Re: CPU% wrong for fractional ...
Last post by hucker - September 13, 2023, 08:00:14 PMBut which program calculates the % from those numbers? I can have 03:15:45 (02:46:40) 85.14% 0.7C, where the 0.7 is not taken into account. Things like 6C are ok though.
#17
Questions / Re: BoincTasks JS beta 2.0 rel...
Last post by fred - September 13, 2023, 12:50:31 PM6) Click on Nr to sort first first of last first.
#18
Questions / Re: BoincTasks JS beta 2.0 rel...
Last post by fred - September 13, 2023, 12:20:32 PM4) You can suspend a range, click on the first one and shift click on another one.
To suspend all go to the project tab and suspend.
To suspend everything, use snooze on the icon. Or Extra -> Allow
https://github.com/efmer/boinctasks-js/issues/112
To suspend all go to the project tab and suspend.
To suspend everything, use snooze on the icon. Or Extra -> Allow
https://github.com/efmer/boinctasks-js/issues/112 #19
Questions / Re: BoincTasks JS beta 2.0 rel...
Last post by Aurum - September 13, 2023, 11:00:48 AM8. The items on the bottom bar to the right of dark & tasks are usually: Abort, Suspend, Resume, Update, Suspend, and +Rule. But Ready to Report:3 is transient and when it appears the position of all those buttons re-centers. If one is aiming your mouse for Suspend or Resume and Ready to Report appears or disappears you're likely to click the wrong item. I've aborted WUs I only meant to Suspend, usually trying to shutdown before peak rates for TOU service begins. Please make them stop jumping around, maybe put Ready to Report in its own box far to the right.
4. The operation is to Suspend or Not Allow New Work for all computers not do something to a single computer. My fix now is to resort Project column to ascending and scroll to bottom.
I'm running this on Linux.
4. The operation is to Suspend or Not Allow New Work for all computers not do something to a single computer. My fix now is to resort Project column to ascending and scroll to bottom.
I'm running this on Linux.
#20
Beta Testing / Re: "Extra, boinc prefs" gets ...
Last post by fred - September 13, 2023, 09:56:20 AMAdded to the todo list