Do these times look right?

hitbyaprkedcar7 · 12-26-06, 09:55 PM

Look at the linux7 on the left, the black box.

Its a 2.4ghz P4 running linux, with forceasm advmethods and verbosity 9

Iv had these WU's before and it doesnt take nearly 6 hours a damn frame!!!

Have had one of these units before, and it took a long time, but not 6 hours a frame.

Running it in the background via "nohup ./FAH504-Linux.exe -verbosity 9 -forceasm -advmethods &" and then using "tail -f nohup.out" to follow it

leelegend · 12-27-06, 01:46 AM

what is the log file on the right? - that looks fine

dont like the one on the left

lee

jws2346 · 12-27-06, 03:18 PM

Holey crapo, I must be doing this math thing wrong. On the left (white letters on a black background) I get about 15 mins per frame and on the right(black letters on a white background) I get about 9 mins per frame. WHAT AM I DOING WRONG????? I need help BAD!!!!!!

ChasR · 12-27-06, 04:20 PM

@ jws

There are a lot of 15 minutes checkpoints per frame.

@hit

Depending on how many checkpoints occurred prior to the restart, It may be running about half as fast as it should. Two instances running? Something else eating cycles?

Folks on dialup aren't going to be thrilled when they hit this thread. Could you perhaps edit your post to just the text of the log?

How many checkpoints did it make before it was restarted? From what you've posted, we don't really know how long a frame takes.

ihrsetrdr · 12-27-06, 07:17 PM

@Matt, re: the wu shown in the terminal- you could stop it then run -config again and choose 30 mins for checkpoints. The logfile for the different wu(on the right) looks normal.

Why are you trying to run the wu in the backround with the nohup command ? Are you using the machine heavily, and trying to keep up the production?

jws2346 · 12-27-06, 07:59 PM

Thanks ChasR for putting up with us "noobs" asking rather dumb questions (talk about putting finger into action without engaging brain), what confused me was all the checkpoints. I was just subtracting one from the other and not paying attention to the fact it wasn't a complete frame. D'oh

hitbyaprkedcar7 · 12-27-06, 08:13 PM

Well, stupid me forgot to kill some of the processes and had like 6 fah clients running! :doh fixed it now. Sorrry about the large image, i thought i told imageshack to downsize it

As for the nohup, how else could i run it in the background? This linux box is also a webserver for a few websites....

ihrsetrdr · 12-27-06, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hitbyaprkedcar7

As for the nohup, how else could i run it in the background? This linux box is also a webserver for a few websites....

I'm just curious why it needs to run in the "background", or what is meant by background, in this instance. Would it be the same to just run as a service?

hitbyaprkedcar7 · 12-27-06, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihrsetrdr

I'm just curious why it needs to run in the "background", or what is meant by background, in this instance. Would it be the same to just run as a service?

Its on a linux server machine, running Red Hat Server, i think. Only way to access the machine is via SSH, so using the nohup lets the client run in the "background" so i can do other stuff with the SSH, and keeps it running while im logged out of the machine. Its more so me minimizing the client in a desktop environment, me thinks. Not sure what/how it does/work, all i know is it does

lol

ihrsetrdr · 12-27-06, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hitbyaprkedcar7

Its on a linux server machine, running Red Hat Server, i think. Only way to access the machine is via SSH, so using the nohup lets the client run in the "background" so i can do other stuff with the SSH, and keeps it running while im logged out of the machine. Its more so me minimizing the client in a desktop environment, me thinks. Not sure what/how it does/work, all i know is it does

lol

Interesting...

I just use VNC for remotes, but that's on a home network . I did use PuTTY for a while to remote in when I was running unhappy_mage's Foldix. It's my understanding that ssh is much more secure, but for a LAN I wouldn't think it would matter, when behind a NAT router.

harlam357 · 12-28-06, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihrsetrdr

Interesting...

I just use VNC for remotes, but that's on a home network . I did use PuTTY for a while to remote in when I was running unhappy_mage's Foldix. It's my understanding that ssh is much more secure, but for a LAN I wouldn't think it would matter, when behind a NAT router.

That's right... just remember to keep the proper ports closed kids.

hitbyaprkedcar7 · 12-28-06, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ihrsetrdr

Interesting...

I just use VNC for remotes, but that's on a home network . I did use PuTTY for a while to remote in when I was running unhappy_mage's Foldix. It's my understanding that ssh is much more secure, but for a LAN I wouldn't think it would matter, when behind a NAT router.

Ohh but its not on my lan, its in an office building a few miles away, on my domain. linux7.*********.com

Plus, it will only accept SSH login's from my home IP address, so its safe

ihrsetrdr · 12-28-06, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hitbyaprkedcar7

Ohh but its not on my lan, its in an office building a few miles away, on my domain. linux7.*********.com

Plus, it will only accept SSH login's from my home IP address, so its safe

I figured that it was business related- Redhat is cool, but not sexy.

12-26-06, 09:55 PM	Thread Starter #1
hitbyaprkedcar7 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Barnegat, NJ	Do these times look right? Look at the linux7 on the left, the black box. Its a 2.4ghz P4 running linux, with forceasm advmethods and verbosity 9 Iv had these WU's before and it doesnt take nearly 6 hours a damn frame!!! Have had one of these units before, and it took a long time, but not 6 hours a frame. Running it in the background via "nohup ./FAH504-Linux.exe -verbosity 9 -forceasm -advmethods &" and then using "tail -f nohup.out" to follow it __________________ [:::::CPU::::\\//:::::: AMD64 4800+X2 @2.9ghz::::::\\//::] [::::MOBO:::\\//::::::ASUS A8N32 SLI DELUXE::::::::\\//::] [:::::GPU::::\\//:::::: Dual BFG 7900GTX's SLI ::::::\\//:::] [:::SOUND:::\\//::Sound Blaster X-Fi ExtremeMusic::\\//:::] [:::::RAM::::\\//:::::2gb OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5::::::\\//:::] [:::::HDD::::\\//::4x37gb WD Raptors RAID 0+1:::::\\//:::] [:::::PSU::::\\//::::::OCZ 520watt ModStream:::::::\\//:::] [::::COOL:::\\//:::: D5:TDX:2xMAZE4:120.3BIP2::::\\//:::] <QUOTE> [[benbaked]] - I've heard those words before, she was complaining about me not listening to her or something, I dunno exactly what I wasn't really paying attention.</QUOTE> :mad: :mad: Oh the HEAT:mad: :mad:
	QUOTE Thanks

12-27-06, 01:46 AM	#2
leelegend Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London, England	what is the log file on the right? - that looks fine dont like the one on the left lee __________________ mac pro WinSMP x 1 \| mac pro OSX smp x 5 \| mac book pro OSXsmp x 1 \| X2 4400 WinSMP x 1 \| E6850 WinSMP x 1 \| E6400 WinSMP x 3 \| QX6700 WinSMP + GPU \| E6600 WinSMP x 1 \| mac pro octo core smp x 2 \| T7200 x 1 Plus 50 rigs under 7 days - more OSX power than you can wave a stick at
	QUOTE Thanks

12-27-06, 03:18 PM	#3
jws2346 Join Date: Sep 2006	Holey crapo, I must be doing this math thing wrong. On the left (white letters on a black background) I get about 15 mins per frame and on the right(black letters on a white background) I get about 9 mins per frame. WHAT AM I DOING WRONG????? I need help BAD!!!!!! __________________ One cat (OC'ed depending on amount of catnip) Intel E6600 (OC'ed 3.0 GHz, WC'in') WinSMP Intel E6600 (stock, air coolin') Ubuntu 64 6.10 SMP Intel E6420 (OC'ed 2.8 GHz, air) Ubuntu 64 6.10 SMP Intel E6300 (on the floor, open) doin' nothing but wastin' electricity (only kidding, I surf with it to keep my folders undisturbed. All but the cat and E6300 folding their little transisters out 24/7
	QUOTE Thanks

12-27-06, 04:20 PM	#4
ChasR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Atlanta	@ jws There are a lot of 15 minutes checkpoints per frame. @hit Depending on how many checkpoints occurred prior to the restart, It may be running about half as fast as it should. Two instances running? Something else eating cycles? Folks on dialup aren't going to be thrilled when they hit this thread. Could you perhaps edit your post to just the text of the log? How many checkpoints did it make before it was restarted? From what you've posted, we don't really know how long a frame takes. __________________ All ppd from friends and family. Many thanks to HayesK for his support and congrats on being the #1 Folder on Team 32. Special thanks to ChrisC and ColinC
	QUOTE Thanks

12-27-06, 07:17 PM	#5
ihrsetrdr Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Phelan,Ca.	@Matt, re: the wu shown in the terminal- you could stop it then run -config again and choose 30 mins for checkpoints. The logfile for the different wu(on the right) looks normal. Why are you trying to run the wu in the backround with the nohup command ? Are you using the machine heavily, and trying to keep up the production? __________________ ihrsetrdr aka Tim Be strong when you are weak, brave when you are scared, and humble when you are victorious. - Unknown
	QUOTE Thanks

Do these times look right?

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

12-27-06, 07:59 PM	#6
jws2346 Join Date: Sep 2006	Thanks ChasR for putting up with us "noobs" asking rather dumb questions (talk about putting finger into action without engaging brain), what confused me was all the checkpoints. I was just subtracting one from the other and not paying attention to the fact it wasn't a complete frame. D'oh __________________ One cat (OC'ed depending on amount of catnip) Intel E6600 (OC'ed 3.0 GHz, WC'in') WinSMP Intel E6600 (stock, air coolin') Ubuntu 64 6.10 SMP Intel E6420 (OC'ed 2.8 GHz, air) Ubuntu 64 6.10 SMP Intel E6300 (on the floor, open) doin' nothing but wastin' electricity (only kidding, I surf with it to keep my folders undisturbed. All but the cat and E6300 folding their little transisters out 24/7
	QUOTE Thanks

12-27-06, 08:13 PM	Thread Starter #7
hitbyaprkedcar7 Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Barnegat, NJ	Well, stupid me forgot to kill some of the processes and had like 6 fah clients running! :doh fixed it now. Sorrry about the large image, i thought i told imageshack to downsize it As for the nohup, how else could i run it in the background? This linux box is also a webserver for a few websites.... __________________ [:::::CPU::::\\//:::::: AMD64 4800+X2 @2.9ghz::::::\\//::] [::::MOBO:::\\//::::::ASUS A8N32 SLI DELUXE::::::::\\//::] [:::::GPU::::\\//:::::: Dual BFG 7900GTX's SLI ::::::\\//:::] [:::SOUND:::\\//::Sound Blaster X-Fi ExtremeMusic::\\//:::] [:::::RAM::::\\//:::::2gb OCZ Platinum 2-3-2-5::::::\\//:::] [:::::HDD::::\\//::4x37gb WD Raptors RAID 0+1:::::\\//:::] [:::::PSU::::\\//::::::OCZ 520watt ModStream:::::::\\//:::] [::::COOL:::\\//:::: D5:TDX:2xMAZE4:120.3BIP2::::\\//:::] <QUOTE> [[benbaked]] - I've heard those words before, she was complaining about me not listening to her or something, I dunno exactly what I wasn't really paying attention.</QUOTE> :mad: :mad: Oh the HEAT:mad: :mad:
	QUOTE Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search