I have 4 computers, all using the same prefrences (keep enough work for ten days at the moment), however
the slowest one (a p3 1000mhz and only just slower than the others) only ever has one work unit. All the others had at least 20 each.

Now my p4 3ghz dual core (the fastest one) has started to do the same thing. It now only has 2 WU (one for each processor). All computers are crunching 100% of the time.

Any ideas as to how to fix it...

I can't see your computers. They are hidden...

---

Logan.

BOINC FAQ Service (Ahora, también disponible en Español/Now available in Spanish)

Hi Rick,

two things worth to check:

- Make sure you do not use localised preferences, they do override you web settings (to check this, open BOINC manager -> advanced view -> Advanced -> Preferences and click the "Clear"-button to revert to the web based preferences),

- Make sure all of your hosts are set to the same venue. There are four different venues possible (default, home, work and school) which each having their own set of preferences/settings.

HTH
Andy

Hi Andy I have done the "clear-button" thing already and all computers are using the default location which I belive is "home" (just double checking now)

I'm guessing it's something at the server end (i.e the seti servers) that is limiting work units to those two computers. I can understand not giving too many to the slow computer but fail to see why the fast computer is being starved.

This could be the problem:

% of time BOINC client is running 100 %
While BOINC running, % of time work is allowed 0 %

I still haven't found the solution...

This could be the problem:

% of time BOINC client is running 100 %
While BOINC running, % of time work is allowed 0 %

I still haven't found the solution...

That is exactly the problem (the second line: "While BOINC running, % of time work is allowed). I'm surprised to see it at 0%, as it should never get that low. Under normal circumstances, simply letting it run is the best solution as it would straighten itself out over time (i.e. the more you allow BOINC to run, the higher the 0% would become).

If you feel comfortable with editing files in the BOINC directory, I can tell you how to manually correct the issue.

---

Hi OzzFan, I'll give the editing files thing a try, if you tell me how.

(I'll make copies in case I muck it up)
Thanks for your help.

Make sure you exit or stop BOINC (if you have it installed as a service) first before continuing.

Navigate to your BOINC folder (default is C:\\Program Files\\BOINC*) and edit the client_state.xml file. Find the <active_frac> </active_frac> section (this is your "While BOINC running, % of time work is allowed" stat) and change it from whatever it currently is to 1.000000 (six trailing zeros to be safe). Save the file and restart BOINC.


*I notice you're running Vista. If your default location is C:\\Program Files\\BOINC or C:\\Program Files(x86)\\BOINC, you may want to consider moving it to C:\\BOINC instead. Windows Defender/User Account Control block most apps from writing to the \\Program Files folders per Microsoft's new policy (unless the app is MS approved). BOINC v5 has known issues with Vista that will hopefully be corrected in BOINC v6, but until then there's only the workaround of putting it in C:\\BOINC.

---

Sweet fix OzzFan, thank you very much, nuff wu's came through. I am running boinc in the c:\\program files\\boinc directory, I have all that nasty UAC/defender stuff turned off or disabled (or both, just to sure lol)

I was having serious problems a while back with boinc client not being able to talk to the boinc manager, and i tried it an many different directorys, settings, I installed and Uninstalled many times too, as well as mucking about in the registery, and finally broke my system messing about with permissions. I had to reload everything after that.

However these new versions of boinc, seem to install ok and work fine it the default installation directory "c:\\program files\\boinc"
(apert from new problem in the latest versions where I have to go into taskmanager and manually shut down the tray icon thing during install)

The 3 machines running XP cause more of a problem now as i have to mess with the permissions if boinc is installed into the default direcory but only if trying to run boincview or the thing with the starmap.

I'll be happy to answer any questions about my setup if it will help somebody else..

thanks again... Rick

Yeah, as long as UAC is turned off, BOINC has no problems with auto-startup or the default install location. I had my setup the same way until I read about a DNS attack that affected Win2k/XP/Vista machines without UAC. I have also personally had to support some Vista machines where UAC was a time saver in getting rid of some problems. Now I run with UAC turned on for the extra security no matter how annoying it might be. My time is worth more than the aggravation caused by UAC compared to fighting malware/viruses.

---

Yeah, as long as UAC is turned off, BOINC has no problems with auto-startup or the default install location. I had my setup the same way until I read about a DNS attack that affected Win2k/XP/Vista machines without UAC. I have also personally had to support some Vista machines where UAC was a time saver in getting rid of some problems. Now I run with UAC turned on for the extra security no matter how annoying it might be. My time is worth more than the aggravation caused by UAC compared to fighting malware/viruses.

The uac was driving me up the wall, i think i would rather have a virus or norton software. I do like the windows firewall, i don't hear a peep out of it, zone alarm had me pooping my pants every two minutes...

LOL Well, manage about 200 computers a day and tell me if you'd rather deal with viruses!

I used to be a big fan of Norton products, but ever since Norton Utilities 1.0 for Windows 95 (and all subsequent products like Norton SystemWorks), I have noticed that they are extreme resource hogs. I kept with them until Norton SystemWorks 2005 decided that it refused to stay activated (even though no hardware changes had occurred) and therefore the auto-protection wasn't working (don't want to protect those illegal machines, do we?).

Once I got sick of paying for a product that wasn't protecting me and still stole all my system resources, I decided that I would try different products. I've been happy with Eset NOD32 AV (rated the best independently) and my hardware firewall. Still, I like the added protection and peace of mind.

Incidentally, your AV/anti-malware package are only as good as the latest updates, and your firewall is only helpful against most types of attacks. The DNS attack I was talking about earlier isn't malware or a virus, and it worked through standard port 80 (used for web traffic) to attack the local machine's DNS resolver cache. A lot of "protected" Windows machines were still effected, except Windows Vista machines with UAC enabled.

When it comes to security and my personal frustration dealing with supporting machines, I don't take any chances.

---