Message boards :
Number crunching :
BOINC 4.09
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Contact Send message Joined: 16 Jan 00 Posts: 195 Credit: 2,249,004 RAC: 0 |
OK. Really fond of 4.08. Best Yet. Hope 4.09 kills a few more bugs. Especially for dialup and slow puters. Don't wanna try 4.09 till i have an unsolvable problem. But, what say you! |
HachPi Send message Joined: 2 Aug 99 Posts: 481 Credit: 21,807,425 RAC: 21 |
If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it... Greetz from Belgium ;-)) |
ric Send message Joined: 16 Jun 03 Posts: 482 Credit: 666,047 RAC: 0 |
as usual: -use to your own risk -make first a backup of your boinc folder into an other folder 4.09 EXE symbol files Installed so far 3 clients (xp, not sp2) will wait a while to see behaviour. so far NO more ssmmaalll ffrrreeezzzeeee |
ChinookFoehn Send message Joined: 18 Apr 02 Posts: 462 Credit: 24,039 RAC: 0 |
|
Kevin N. Shapley Send message Joined: 1 Jan 00 Posts: 100 Credit: 2,539,295 RAC: 0 |
I have been using 4.05 on two AMD and one Intel boxes with no visible signs of any problems. Am I lucky or is there something I am missing by not upgrading to newer versions of BOINC? Seriously, WU's download, crunch, upload, then download some more and the only pesky thing is having to do a manual update to get the ready to reports out of the way. Are the newer versions somehow better coded to do what they are required to do faster, better, or more efficiently? Thank you for a serious answer in advance. <a> [/url] |
Heffed Send message Joined: 19 Mar 02 Posts: 1856 Credit: 40,736 RAC: 0 |
> I have been using 4.05 on two AMD and one Intel boxes with no visible signs of > any problems. > > Am I lucky or is there something I am missing by not upgrading to newer > versions of BOINC? No. 4.05 is the latest official publice release. Anything above that is alpha. If 4.05 works for you, (that's what I'm running) keep it until the next public release. |
Kevin N. Shapley Send message Joined: 1 Jan 00 Posts: 100 Credit: 2,539,295 RAC: 0 |
@Heffed Thanks, that is what my gut said, but you know how new shiny things can be..;) |
mikey Send message Joined: 17 Dec 99 Posts: 4215 Credit: 3,474,603 RAC: 0 |
> Seriously, WU's download, crunch, upload, then download some more and the > only pesky thing is having to do a manual update to get the ready to reports > out of the way. > The amount of time between reconnections to send those is adjustable from your account page. Mine was set at 2 days and I just changed it to 1 day and it seems to be working better, for me. |
STE\/E Send message Joined: 29 Mar 03 Posts: 1137 Credit: 5,334,063 RAC: 0 |
A word of WARNING to those with P4 HT CPU's, I installed the 4.09 on 1 PC that I've been having trouble with running CPDN WU's and if nothing else it knocked the Piss out of my Benchmark Score. I went from Mid 1700's with HT Enabled to Mid 1300's...Floating Point Speed With HT Disabled I went from about 2050 to 1650...Floating Point Speed So it looks about like a 400 Point loss with the v4.09 for HT CPU's or maybe it was just that PC in particular, I don't know. But I'm not putting it on another PC until somebody confirms this loss of Benchmark score... |
ric Send message Joined: 16 Jun 03 Posts: 482 Credit: 666,047 RAC: 0 |
> so far NO more ssmmaalll ffrrreeezzzeeee Guten Morgen Herr Richard >Bitte, was meinen Sie dabei? nun ja nicht ganz einfach zu beschreiben. Da sind noch finetuning Arbeiten im Gange welche etwas mit dem "Kommunikations-Teil" des Clients zu tun haben, soweit ich verstanden habe. einzelne User berichten, über Stabilitätsprobleme der offiziellen clients ob die in der Masse zutrifft, lässt sich so nicht erhärten. Bei mir wirkt sich dies so aus, manchmal, scheint der Cursor zu hängen, schreibe weiter, jedoch die Characters are not displayed und Bruchteile einer Sekunde später wird der Bildschirm wieder gerefreshed und der "scheinbar" kurzzeitige Hänger ist weg. Es spielt ME keine Rolle ob der Client einen Transfer ausübt oder nur rechnet. Dieses Verhalten, so kann ich "für mich" berichten, zeigt der client 4.09 nicht mehr. dies meinte ich mit > so far NO more ssmmaalll ffrrreeezzzeeee nicht ganz einfach, in Worte zu kleiden. für mich ist einer der haupsächlichen Gründe einen higher level client zu verwenden, die stark verbesserte Managability, die entfernte Steuerung des network access zum Beispiel finde ich einen Hit. Die allerdings nur über rpc. Aber dies ist eine persönliche Meinung von mir. Ich denke, mit einer vorausgehenden Sicherstellung kann das Risiko, während eines Upgrades des Client Daten zu verlieren, doch deutlich reduziert werden. Hatte bis Anhin noch keine Datenverluste mit diesem Vorgehen friendly regard ric @Kevin >Am I lucky or is there something I am missing by not upgrading to newer versions of BOINC? This is a very personal choise. There is some ++ to migrate, also some -- to do it. Due I'm using a Boinc Add-on only based over rpc, I "have" to use a boinc client, able to serve information over this technique. Some more advanced remote procedure call are implemented in client 4.06 and above. This is for ME a valid reason to give at least a try. (don't tell it anybody else, but for me, I never had a "better" client") 2 of the clients a attached to cpdn and seti. It looks like the "thingy" with the preemting is solved much better. I do see my cpdn and seti clients, preemting (now called pausing) on a frequent manner. The other thing, be lucky, if you system is not showing the possible non linearity, perhaps you have it perhaps not, perhaps your system are to fast to recognize it as a "failure" and handle it themself. If you don't see any problems on your side, there is basicaly not need to upgrade until official launch. friendly ric |
Ingleside Send message Joined: 4 Feb 03 Posts: 1546 Credit: 15,832,022 RAC: 13 |
> A word of WARNING to those with P4 HT CPU's, I installed the 4.09 on 1 PC that > I've been having trouble with running CPDN WU's and if nothing else it knocked > the Piss out of my Benchmark Score. > > I went from Mid 1700's with HT Enabled to Mid 1300's...Floating Point Speed > With HT Disabled I went from about 2050 to 1650...Floating Point Speed > > So it looks about like a 400 Point loss with the v4.09 for HT CPU's or maybe > it was just that PC in particular, I don't know. But I'm not putting it on > another PC until somebody confirms this loss of Benchmark score... > > The benchmark has undergone some changes so it now actually does the different tests and isn't optimized-away by the compiler. This of course gives lower benchmark-scores, but this is fixable by changing cobblestone-factor again. |
STE\/E Send message Joined: 29 Mar 03 Posts: 1137 Credit: 5,334,063 RAC: 0 |
The benchmark has undergone some changes so it now actually does the different tests and isn't optimized-away by the compiler. This of course gives lower benchmark-scores, but this is fixable by changing cobblestone-factor again. ========== It's also fixable by going back to the v4.05 which I did and got my 400 points back...hehe ;) |
Paul D. Buck Send message Joined: 19 Jul 00 Posts: 3898 Credit: 1,158,042 RAC: 0 |
Ingleside, > The benchmark has undergone some changes so it now actually does the different > tests and isn't optimized-away by the compiler. This of course gives lower > benchmark-scores, but this is fixable by changing cobblestone-factor again. Yes, but this might get my experience with work done and credit claimed and granted. My fastest and HT processors are asking for more credit than the other participant's computers. Besides, it is about the science... <p> For BOINC Documentaion: Click Me! |
PyroFox Send message Joined: 5 Apr 03 Posts: 155 Credit: 213,891 RAC: 0 |
or IS it?? .. of course it is :P who doesn't want to find that elusive signal... *i don't see any haaaaaannnddss!* ;) -Fox [/url] |
Patrick_ Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 30 Credit: 9,657 RAC: 0 |
So far so good! Running much better than 4.08, no freezes so far, running XP SP2. The CPU benchmarks took a little longer than normal, but nothing out of the ordinary. [url=http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/] |
xi3piscium Send message Joined: 17 Aug 99 Posts: 287 Credit: 26,674 RAC: 0 |
4.09 for nix.....anyone know where? <img> |
SpaceRat Send message Joined: 17 Feb 02 Posts: 47 Credit: 799,501 RAC: 0 |
> 4.09 for nix.....anyone know where? Here is the Link Boinc 4.09 TEAMLESS?? Drop by ours and have a look SETI Synergy |
webmaster10 Send message Joined: 17 Jun 99 Posts: 4 Credit: 64,474 RAC: 0 |
Loaded 4.09 last night on Win98 SE, connection wireless. Run Seti & LHC. Smooth, did benchmarks w/o burping, work units running right along, uploaded completed units fine. By jove, I think they've got it. |
Nuwanda Send message Joined: 2 Aug 03 Posts: 71 Credit: 1,337,642 RAC: 0 |
> If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it... > > Greetz from Belgium ;-)) > > > that is so true. no problems on my AMD here, so unless i do encounter any (or am required to), im sticking to 4.05 ---------------------------- Team X-BTF S@H Forums S@h Berkeley's Staff Friends Club © member <img> |
Patrick_ Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 30 Credit: 9,657 RAC: 0 |
I can't upload now... either 4.09 or server is down. [url=http://setiweb.ssl.berkeley.edu/] |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.