21) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 70379) Posted 16 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Hyperthreading is sharing the CPU, not splitting it in two. Each "virtual" > CPU gets whatever it can from the real one. OK, I'll try setting it for one CPU and see what happens. I'm not sure of the right terminology for the hyperthreading and how it works (I do know there is only one physical CPU), but I do know that running SETI with "2 CPU's" will net 2 completed WU's in about 3 hours. If dropping the CPU use down to 1 will change that work output, well, ClimatePrediction is gonna be SOL, I'm afraid... unless and until the BOINC software can be modified to optionally run WU's from one project at a time on all CPU's, virtual or real... > You have that right now. But if you join multiple projects you're telling > BOINC to split the work between the projects, using the seti@home preferences > for resource sharing. > > Maybe if you changed the resource settings you can get what you're looking for > - like 75%seti, 25% climateprediction. Or 66/33. Experiment a bit and let it > run for several cycles each time. This is how I discovered that the simultaneous running of SETI and ClimatePrediction was having a problem. I set SETI at 200 and left ClimatePrediction at 100, which sets up the 66/33 (or 2 to 1) scenario you mentioned. After a couple of days I'd get some SETI WU's at 3 hours and others almost 4. A definite change. So, yesterday I went all the way and detached from ClimatePrediction and voila, ALL the SETI WU's are finishing up at around 3 hours again. There is some kind of work conflict going on with running ClimatePrediction and SETI together, which is causing SETI WU's (and perhaps ClimatePrediction WU's) to take longer to complete. This is inefficient and I'm looking for workarounds... [EDIT]: I also still think Norton Ghost and True Image 8 have something to do with this conflict, too, because when either of them are installed and the two different projects are running is when this WU slowdown happens...

22) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 70354) Posted 16 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Try setting your "On multiprocessors, use at most" to "1". See if that makes > a difference. Hmm. I would think that would tell BOINC to only process on one half of the processor instead of both halves, wouldn't it? While that would eliminate simultaneous crunching it would also cut the work performed in half. Is there a way to tell BOINC to run two threads of each project at a time? If not, can the BOINC software be modified to provide the option to run two of one project followed by two of another or the current way of one of each?

23) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 70334) Posted 16 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: ** UPDATE ** Well, I've done some more experimentation to try to figure out my WU slowdown and have discovered that it's not Norton Ghost slowing me down, after all. At least, not very much. Turns out the major reason for my WU slowdown is because I also crunch for ClimatePrediction.net. Apparently, with my HT computer, any SETI unit that crunches while the ClimatePrediction.net unit is crunching takes almost an hour longer to complete. Why? I have no idea. I guess the crunching of the two different type of WU's simultaneously just doesn't blend well together in a hyperthreaded CPU. I've detached from the ClimatePrediction.net project and now my SETI WU's are completing in 3 hours, again. Is there any way to get BOINC to crunch the two different projects sequentially instead of simultaneously on a hyperthreaded or multiprocessor computer? My laptop (Centrino system) does just fine, but it crunches for one project or the other. That appears to work just fine... K

24) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 65194) Posted 14 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > If you do figure this out, can you drop me a line? This should be added to the > FAQ! > > I know I mention background processes slowing things down ... but this may > need a new question all by itself. > > Have you thought of asking Norton about this? I sure will, and yes, I have an open tech support ticket with Norton about this. That's as far as it's gotten to date, but I will get as much as I can for info and will keep this thread updated. K

25) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64308) Posted 14 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: Well, I tried setting Ghost up to do just full backups but the filesave threads stayed running, even after a reboot. So, guess that won't save me a thing. Guess I'm stuck at this point...

26) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64196) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: OK, so now I'm wondering how I can minimize the slowdown. Maybe if I turn off the incremental backups and just have it do a full backup, instead? That way Ghost won't need to know which files have been changed because it will have to back them all up, anyway... I smell an experiment coming on...

27) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64181) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Does Ghost have an option that tracks changed files? So it knows when to > schedule another backup? It could be setting a system wide hook for > all file accesses, which would really impact BOINC. I found the same > thing happened when I installed an "undelete" program. Looks like you got yourself a BINGO, Walt! I scouted around this new program I'm using to check stuff out with (called Process Explorer) and when I open up the "System" process lo and behold there are a bunch of threads called "PQV2i.sys!VSnapFSNotification"... Now, let's break that down, shall we? PQV2i.sys = the Ghost process VSnap = I Googled this and it's an "open file backup utility" for use in third party backup programs, like Ghost... FSNotification = I'm gonna go out on a limb here and guess "FileSave Notification" - ya THINK??? So, perhaps Ghost is logging every filesave that occurs on the PC it's running on. Crap. Why don't they just look for the Archive flag on the $@#*& file???

28) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64174) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Does Ghost have an option that tracks changed files? So it knows when to > schedule another backup? It could be setting a system wide hook for > all file accesses, which would really impact BOINC. I found the same > thing happened when I installed an "undelete" program. > > Try this: change your preferences for "write to disk every..." to 1800 - thats > 30 minutes. Let it run for awhile to see if it makes a difference. Be sure > to set it back to some more reasonable value later. Excellent question, Walt. I've wondered about that, too. I've looked for evidence of that type of hook, but haven't seen anything to suggest one, yet. I'll keep looking, though. I'm running 600 (every 10 minutes) for disk writing, but I'll try the 1800 and see if that makes a difference. Great suggestion! Thanks!

29) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64164) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Sorry, that is what happens when you don't fully read the whole thread > > I have Ghost installed on one of my boxes, and have not noticed a slow down > TBH. > > Dunc Not a problem... I also have Ghost on other boxes in the office. None of them seem to slow down, at least not as much and as noticeably as my desktop system does. Very frustrating - K

30) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64162) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > > That's just it! The Task Manager shows that SETI is taking the whole > thing > > (50% for each running WU - I'm hyperthreaded). > > > I think that is how it should be. > > with one cpu it should take 100% > with 2 cpus (or 1 with HT) you should have 2 instances with 50% > with 4 cpus (or 2 with HT) you should have 4 instances with 25% Exactly! SETI is doing exactly as it should. So, what's slowing down my computer??? That's the puzzle. Why, only when Ghost is installed, does SETI take almost 4 hours to run each WU instead of the usual 3 hours (when Ghost is NOT installed)?? This is the mystery I'm trying to figure out... K

31) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 64158) Posted 13 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > What does the task manager show for CPU usage? From your figures I would > expect that SETI is getting less than 75% of the CPU -- so who's taking the > rest? That's just it! The Task Manager shows that SETI is taking the whole thing (50% for each running WU - I'm hyperthreaded). This is what makes me think that the installation of Ghost is replacing a DLL or some other file that it shouldn't. Something that is causing the slowdown. I've just uninstalled and reinstalled Ghost again, then ran "sfc /scannow" to make sure all the XP files are what they're supposed to be. I'm about to use PerfectDisk 7 to defragment the drive, then let SETI run to see what's what... I'll report back as to what I find out...

32) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 63594) Posted 12 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: Update. I've submitted a question to Symantec tech support about this, asking them why my system slows down with their Ghost 9 installed. This is the response I just received... "We have received your request for assistance and a Symantec Authorized Technical Support agent will contact you by email within the next 4-5 business days to help answer your questions..." 4 to 5 business days??? I bet my customers are glad I don't take that $#%& long... grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

33) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 63571) Posted 12 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Might be worth checking running services- it could be loading things up there > so they don't show in the startup section. It has one service that runs all the time (a scheduling service, I believe), but that doesn't appear to be the culprit. I did an experiment by stopping the service for a day to see what that would do for my WU times. Nothing. They still are running out to almost 4 hours per unit instead of the 3 they should be running. I tell ya, this thing really has me baffled. I've been at this for days and haven't found anything anywhere on the net about it. I've tried eveything I can think of to no avail. I've even downloaded and installed the Intel chipset drivers just to make sure there isn't some low-level problem there. Didn't make any difference for my problem, of course. I just wish I knew what these type programs do and what they latch onto or start or whatever. Might give me a clue as to why this is happening. I mean, you wouldn't think they would be doing ANYTHING while there isn't a backup in progress, so why would the computer system take almost an hour more to do a WU? I don't get it...

34) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 63549) Posted 12 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > Check your startup files (System configuration Utility, startup tab). > It's probably got some osrt of Quick start or Short cut running on the taskbar > & that's sucking up CPU cycles. > It'd probably be worth clobbering a lot of the stuff you find there (M$ > Office, Find Fast, video & audio driver "utilities", Quicktime etc). Thanks, I though of that, too. I have a pretty bare startup on this system. Only 4 items, to be exact... a keyboard driver, my AVG antivirus, the TaskSwitch utility, and Spy Sweeper to keep the crap off... Everything else is disabled...

35) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 63541) Posted 12 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: > AFAIK ghost images are compressed, so building them takes some CPU power. > > Regards Hans I should have been more specific. Sorry. The WU's slow down 24/7, even though the backups usually only take a few minutes...

36) Message boards : Number crunching : Anyone have a clue as to why Norton Ghost... (Message 63537) Posted 12 Jan 2005 by Dirigo Software, LLC Post: slows down my WU's from around 3 hours flat to almost 4 hours? I also tried the trial version of True Image 8. Same thing. If I don't run either, no problem. BUT, I need to have something for an automatic backup - this is my main business system, here. I need a backup system that doesn't require a reinstall of XP should I lose a hard drive. I also note that no other computers in the office seem to be affected by Ghost or TI running their WU's. Here is the system: HP a265c PC XP SP2 ASUS P4SD-LA mobo, 3.28 BIOS (latest avail) 3.2G HT P4 (recently upgraded from 2.8G) 1 GB RAM 1 160GB WD 7200 Hard Drive 1 CD-RW, 1 Sony DVD-RW DL Any (useful) ideas??? Thanks! KMan

Previous 20

 
©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.