CPU % usage graph - problem with multithreaded tasks

Started by ElGuillermo, February 10, 2019, 10:37:05 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ElGuillermo

Hi !

I noticed the CPU % usage graph, as seen on "Tasks" tab, doesn't display as expected on multithreaded tasks :

- sometimes the graph is really "low" (but the numbers indicates a high value, which is confirmed by any other CPU usage monitor) ;

- sometimes the graph "explodes", going outside (to the left) of the dedicated column.

... Not very important, but I've seen this since a long time and never took the time to flag it :)

Thanks for BoincTasks an TThrottle !

fred

Quote from: ElGuillermo on February 10, 2019, 10:37:05 AM
Hi !

I noticed the CPU % usage graph, as seen on "Tasks" tab, doesn't display as expected on multithreaded tasks :

- sometimes the graph is really "low" (but the numbers indicates a high value, which is confirmed by any other CPU usage monitor) ;

- sometimes the graph "explodes", going outside (to the left) of the dedicated column.

... Not very important, but I've seen this since a long time and never took the time to flag it :)

Thanks for BoincTasks an TThrottle !
I cached a bit late, what's the project?

ElGuillermo

Hi Fred !

Sorry I didn't see your answer earlier (is there any "mail reply notification" option somewhere ?)

It's on Primegrid (any sub-project shows the bug).

I have uploaded a screenshot here :  https://guillaumejamet.fr/BT_bug.png

Thanks !

fred

Quote from: ElGuillermo on March 15, 2019, 09:46:28 AM
Sorry I didn't see your answer earlier (is there any "mail reply notification" option somewhere ?)
I should get a notification and missed it.
Saved the screenshot and will look at it when I have time in a couple of weeks.


fred


ElGuillermo

Great news ! Thanks ! :)
I've just installed 1.80 and will report in some days.

ElGuillermo


fred

Quote from: ElGuillermo on May 30, 2019, 08:32:56 AM
Everything works as intended :)

->"Fixed" !

Thanks :)
Great, everything was already in place, only forgot one line of code.