[Shouting OFF]
Hi, still waiting for my 9800GTX card, the 8500GT, on my daily driver/host is just NOT suited, cause of the slow monitor-response.
And, not a good test-case, so I'll try SETI-CUDA, afterall :)

I'll put it on a host, used for crunching only .
[OFF TOPIC]
It took 128 hours for a GPUgrid WU
[ON TOPIC]

And it looks like summer, on this side of the pond, yesterday it ws 24C and now it's 19C, crazy . . .But nice .

After CUDA was announced last December I purchased 4 9800 GTX and GTX+ video cards and put them to work for Seti. One of the four GPU's started freezing up while crunching. Sometimes once per day sometimes many times per day. I dealt with it as many have dealt with the problem for a long time. Finally I decided to swap the card into one of my other computers and see if the freezing moved to the new computer or stayed on the old one. Immediately I had freezing problems in the computer that had never had a problem. To me this indicates a hardware problem, not a software problem.

These GPU's are marketed with CUDA capability being a large part of the marketing strategy. I requested and was granted an RMA from the manufacturer stating that the GPU consistantly froze while performing CUDA tasks as the reason. I have since received another identical GPU and it is crunching fine.

I would hope that those of you who are still in the warranty period would investigate the possibility of getting an RMA and exchanging the GPU. Don't just work around the problem with hacks and batch files unless you have no other choice.

Instead of the "--run_benchmarks" command, could a person use the "--quit" command? I notice when I do this I disconnect from localhost but then like clockwork it seems 1 minute later the machine reconnects to localhost and restarts its tasks.

I tried this when 1 of my AP WUs got stuck and it seemed to restart it without any issues.


Is this a bad practice or is this ok?

Thanks

It does seem that way to me as well. I suspect that when the BOINC mananger is open and BOINC is not running as a service, it will auto-restart the BOINC client after one minute.

Raistmer, it was a special moment...

I just installed BOINC 6.6.20.
Then I installed your new v10/11 with no affinity and no CPU->GPU.
Then I ran it for 30 minutes.

Then I got this validated task result:

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=429443399

It was a WU that validated with your machine.

Isn't that an amazing service Raistmer provides? He works on Opti Apps, and he validates your WU's for you, too!

The new software is running perfect. Thanks for all the work you did on it.

Bob

@Jason_gee

Sorry you are having trouble with Symantec.

I personally use their products loyally and have had little or no issues with the 6 schools and dozen or so companies we have it deployed at. I would appreciate it if you would stop bashing by name and perhaps step back and look at the whole picture.

This is not a product bashing thread. I don't care what your experiences are with it.

That is not what I meant SuoerG, and if it came across that way I apologise. I have personally had no trouble with Symantec, but choose another vendor. Also I am sorry it was not clear that neither of the licenses dumped due to false detections at local campuses here were Symantec, but from other vendors. Heuristics & update quality were to blame at those installations, which rendered campus wide networks unusable. There is nothing wrong with expecting information and tools released to be reliable, especially when paid for, and if it proved to be fraudulent that the perpetrators are held accountable for any expense incurred (whoever they be).

False detections across most vendors are a problem from time to time, and in most cases are traceable to 'catchall' type heuristics designed on a principle of 'better to make a false detection than miss something'. In large installations that strategy often results in an expensive and unnecessary waste of time and resources, which usually has the worst impact on the very end-users the products are supposed to be protecting.

Jason

I don't care what your experiences are with it.

Now there's a statement of intolerance. You want your pro-Symantec view to be heard but IYO Jason's anti-Symantec view should be suppressed. Jason backed up his comment with his experience of the product, as did you.

As for my experience... I stopped using it years ago because of all the false positives and what I viewed as bloatware. Even after uninstalling it was still all over my registry.