View Full Version : 2.0
scoobiedoo
10-17-01, 12:04 AM
Okay guys just give me the word and i will install 2.0 on my puters
If we get a good head start we could be a sure for second.
go for it. i switched over just now. i'm using the console program.
remember our team number is 32
breadman
10-17-01, 12:19 AM
im all switched over too, lets crank out them wu's:)
So far, this is who has switched over:
Team members
Rank
(within team) User Score WU
1 Kahnza 29 29
2 pickleloaf 13 10
3 TT120 8 8
4 breadman 6 5
5 Neptune5k 2 2
6 nihili 2 1
7 Dunga_Bee 1 1
8 skip 1 1
9 T._J. 1 1
We all need to grab the console version and get them WU's pumping.
Is the console version faster?
nihili
Traditionally it is. I am still testing that theory.
cowanrg
10-17-01, 08:22 AM
i'm up on it. mine is going right now.
Originally posted by TT120
Traditionally it is. I am still testing that theory.
TT, are you suggesting that we use the "No-nonsense" text-only console version as it is called on the download page, rather than the graphical console?
SickBoy
10-17-01, 08:59 AM
OK, so I've got some questions.
Do I need to uninstall the old f@h before I put 2.0 up?
And is 2.0 hideable like 1.34/EM is? I can't switch my celeron boxes over until it is.
SickBoy
Originally posted by T. J.
TT, are you suggesting that we use the "No-nonsense" text-only console version as it is called on the download page, rather than the graphical console? Either one works ok, I think the console version is faster though but I'm not sure yet. I'm still waiting to get the same protein to test with.
Originally posted by SickBoy
OK, so I've got some questions.
Do I need to uninstall the old f@h before I put 2.0 up?
And is 2.0 hideable like 1.34/EM is? I can't switch my celeron boxes over until it is.
SickBoy I didnt uninstall my old version and the windowed version just went right in the same directory and ran without a problem. The console version is just a simple executable file that i put in the folding directory and since it has a different name than the the original FAH.EXE there werre no problems. The console version can be renamed to FAH.EXE so EM seems to handle it ok. It will also use your original client.cfg so you will have to delete that so it will ask you for your team number which is 32
Dunga Bee
10-17-01, 09:32 AM
TT,
Does your EM track you progress using it with 2.0?
I did the rename trick with the console and em launches it, but didn't seem to track the progress.
So, just to be sure that it was working, I stopped using EM for now and am just using the console.
I have to believe the console is faster with all the redrawing that client version does. I had that thing installed for about 2 minutes and it had to go.
DB
I would agree that the console must be faster than watching the redraws, if for no other reason than having more available clock cycles. What I'm hoping is that they were smart enough to not have the program doing redraws when the graphics aren't being displayed. I sort of like being able to pop up the graphics for a look now and then, but not if it is at the cost of slower folding.
nihili
I opened up the task manager with nothing running but the new graphical version, and in showed winfah.exe using about 5% of CPU time, and the core_65.exe getting 95%. My guess is that the graphical interface is indeed sucking cpu cycles and thus slowing things down.
I haven't had a chance to read all the threads yet; does anyone know if you can run multiple instances of the text console? I'm assuming you can but I'm not at home to test the theory.
Dunga Bee
10-17-01, 10:43 AM
I think there was a post about someone running the console with the -local switch and was able to run multiple instances.
What does running multiple instances get you (if you do not have a multiprocessor machine)?
cowanrg
10-17-01, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by Dunga Bee
I think there was a post about someone running the console with the -local switch and was able to run multiple instances.
What does running multiple instances get you (if you do not have a multiprocessor machine)?
if you have a single processor computer, nothing. if you have a dual chip, then it works well for that. im trying to get some of my computers on a network to not need internet access to run -local, so they will get work units from my main computer.
The case for running multiple clients on a single processor machine is that, when Stanford's servers go down, as they often have in the past, you are not left sitting with no work being done.
If one client completes its work and can't get new work, the second one uses all the CPU time. I always run two instances on each machine that can support it. It takes twice as long per WU but you have less down time, unless Stanford is down for a long time. You just have to make sure that your clients have several hours difference in start times for this to work.
Silent Bob(?) was trying to get two clients working too in order to not have idle time while waiting to upload so I tried it out. I had a little difficulty making sure it was working but it appears to be running two clients at the moment and they ran overnight. This is with the "no nonsense":rolleyes: text only version only. The other version will not allow two clients.
I noticed that some people were having problems with the stats. Is this the text only version that is giving the trouble?
I am considering running the client just on my main box overnight while running the other client on the other machines to see if the stats do update in an effort to find out what the deal is with the stats.
And last.... about the redraws while the client is minimized. I don't think that it redraws while it is minimized. The only reason I have for saying this is that I noticed when redisplaying the client after it has been minimized that it seems to display the last thing that was there before it was minimized and it takes a couple of seconds to get the updated information displayed.
That was a mouthful. ;)
Originally posted by T. J.
I opened up the task manager with nothing running but the new graphical version, and in showed winfah.exe using about 5% of CPU time, and the core_65.exe getting 95%. My guess is that the graphical interface is indeed sucking cpu cycles and thus slowing things down.
I haven't had a chance to read all the threads yet; does anyone know if you can run multiple instances of the text console? I'm assuming you can but I'm not at home to test the theory.
If I'm looking at the graphics, then core_65.exe looses a lot of cycles. But if the graphics are hidden in the system tray, then core_65.exe stays at 99%. So I'm going to guess that running the graphical version with the graphics hidden is at least pretty darn close to running the console version.
I'm still waiting for some actual results when someone gets them.
nihili
SickBoy
10-17-01, 01:24 PM
Doesn't this new version support WU caching? I thought that might eliminate the need for multiple clients.
SickBoy
I believe that the need in the one case is to have enough work that the client does not need to connect to get more work throughout the day.
The caching on this client is a little different than on some others. GAH can create its own work and I'm not sure but I think that caching in SETI means dl'ing extra wu's. The caching on the FAH2 client means that- If for some reason the work cannot be returned to the server it received it from it will store the work for return at a later time and the client will then dl new work. This solves the major problem that Stanford was having with the servers since the assignment server almost never crashes, but the work servers crash with amazing frequency. It does not solve the problem of working with a machine that may not be able to connect or may only connect once/day. Running multiple clients can slow the work down enough that this is possible, though.
I think that I can say that the attempt to run multiple text clients has been a success. They are both working on, returning, getting credit for wu's indepently of one another. There were some problems getting it to work but it did work.
I too am successfully running multiple text clients on several machines. I had similar problems with not getting IDs, but that's squared away now. Since I wasn't able to get EM to run, I created shortcuts with the -local switch on my desktop. Not sure if the switch was necessary but I wanted to make sure they kept their data separate. All are happily folding away. My poor old k6-2/500 is still grinding away on the 1.34 client because I didn't have the heart to shut it down when it is 2/3 of the way thru a WU! :D
hooziewhatsit
10-17-01, 09:16 PM
Ok, I just got the new version up and running on my box. I think I'll move to more than one client as soon as finish wu, or if we discover that the servers decide to crash often.
fold on!
scoobiedoo
10-17-01, 09:58 PM
okay guys i need a little help, I installed the no nonsense console version. when i tried to get a work unit it tells me that it can't get a work unit, that it is sleeping for 5 minutes, any clues?
Hugo 59
10-17-01, 10:08 PM
Originally posted by nihili
If I'm looking at the graphics, then core_65.exe looses a lot of cycles. But if the graphics are hidden in the system tray, then core_65.exe stays at 99%. So I'm going to guess that running the graphical version with the graphics hidden is at least pretty darn close to running the console version.
I'm still waiting for some actual results when someone gets them.
nihili
The core65 must be doing the folding if I close the graphical window it runs at 99% and and winfah is 0.
Originally posted by scoobiedoo
okay guys i need a little help, I installed the no nonsense console version. when i tried to get a work unit it tells me that it can't get a work unit, that it is sleeping for 5 minutes, any clues?
scoobiedoo,
There was a problem that I think was specific to the text only version, but I cannot tell for sure. The systems were having trouble connecting and it had to do with the binding of the TCP/IP stack. With the text only version you may have to bind MS Client for networks to the TCPIP stack, which also opens a security hole in your system unless it is secured through some other means(read-hardware firewall). I read over at Team Helix that they were able to bind the MS family logon to TCP/IP and it worked and is less risky. I haven't read that since earlier today and don't remember everything but they had several very active threads on this topic.
You might want to check out their forum since they are the most active on this topic
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/folding
Dunga Bee
10-17-01, 10:38 PM
Originally posted by scoobiedoo
okay guys i need a little help, I installed the no nonsense console version. when i tried to get a work unit it tells me that it can't get a work unit, that it is sleeping for 5 minutes, any clues?
I have gotten that error as well. I just ended the client and restarted it and I got a protein right away.
I think it may just be that it encountered a problem connecting to the server.
I read a little about the potential security hole, but there were so many differing opinions on it, I was waiting for something more 'official'. All my machines are behind a DSL Router / Firewall, so I do not have security concerns, but I am curious.
scoobiedoo
10-17-01, 10:59 PM
Thanks Dunga Bee,
That helped alot. :) Hey which part of pittsburgh are you from?
Dunga Bee
10-17-01, 11:04 PM
Glad to help.
South Hills of the 'Burgh.
scoobiedoo
10-17-01, 11:06 PM
cool, I live about 50 miles south of there. the only good part about being down here is my cable modem :)
Originally posted by Hugo 59
The core65 must be doing the folding if I close the graphical window it runs at 99% and and winfah is 0.
How did the move go?? Hope everything went well. Anyway... Glad to see you back at it. :D
SickBoy
10-18-01, 12:57 AM
Ok.... Installed the "no-nonsense console" version over top of my 1.34 client as per TT120's instructions..... everything seems to be working right. Renamed the executable "fah.exe" and deleted my client.cfg file. This is on my TBird box only. I'll switch the others over tomorrow.
SickBoy
make sure your client cfg file is right.
you might also want to go delete the registry keys from 1.34.
the console didnt give me credit for some work units but the full version seems to be working.
SickBoy
10-18-01, 01:02 AM
Should this be showing some completed frames at some point? My CPU utilization is between 96 and 99% to Core_65.exe and my CPU temps are about normal for a folding load.... but the console isn't showing the
Finished a frame (1)
or whatever the old version did.
SickBoy
**UPDATE** It took a while, but it looks like it finally finished a frame. I'll wait and see if this one gets me credit in the stats before I change anything else.
Might want to check your client.cfg to be sure that it gave you an ID#.
The text only version needs to started. stopped. and restarted in order to fetch an ID. Without the ID# you won't get credit.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.