It's as Richard said it would be, first need to have the reply from the server back in before the next work request will follow the preferences you set.

Which raises the question: why does the server have to wait until the client tells it back again what the server already knows?

If the server - well, the database - already knows that the Boss says "no more CPU work", why does it have for the client to stop asking for work because the server told it to stop asking?

We both thought that the documentation said that the server would act on its own local knowledge. I'll try and find where I (we?) read that over the weekend.

If the server - well, the database - already knows that the Boss says "no more CPU work", why does it have for the client to stop asking for work because the server told it to stop asking?

Local preferences?

---

Grant
Darwin NT

Speedy wrote:

Do you still require me to send you Scheduler requests?

No, but thanks.

betreger wrote:

If the server - well, the database - already knows that the Boss says "no more CPU work", why does it have for the client to stop asking for work because the server told it to stop asking?

Local preferences?

Preferences on what to use are only available through the project preferences, not through the global or local preferences. There you can only set how to run BOINC, the project preferences dictate what you want to do calculations with.

Richard wrote:

Jord wrote:

It's as Richard said it would be, first need to have the reply from the server back in before the next work request will follow the preferences you set.

Which raises the question: why does the server have to wait until the client tells it back again what the server already knows?

I'll ask the developers. :)

---

Thank you for all the help getting this sorted

---

I have had a bit of a (slightly one sided) talk with David about this.

His answer to me is true, but a bit besides the point I was making. Haven't heard back yet on my latest proposal. ;-)

When a scheduler request asks for zero seconds of CPU, there are many possible reasons.
Project prefs are one.
Or the CPU queue might be full.
The scheduler request doesn't say what the cause is.
Not worth changing this.

---

I have had a bit of a (slightly one sided) talk with David about this.

His answer to me is true, but a bit besides the point I was making. Haven't heard back yet on my latest proposal. ;-)

When a scheduler request asks for zero seconds of CPU, there are many possible reasons.
Project prefs are one.
Or the CPU queue might be full.
The scheduler request doesn't say what the cause is.
Not worth changing this.

It does seem to be a rare enough occurrence that digging into why it sometimes happens wouldn't be a good use of time.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[