• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

V8 Client beta

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Holdolin

Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Location
Manch-Vegas
So I was actually looking at the f@h forums for some API use/guidance when I discovered they have a beta client avial. It's front-end (control) seems to be totally web-based which is good for those of us tired of messin with deprecated python libraries. I'm currently scrounging parts to set up a test bed to offer any feedback not only here, but to the team. Should any of you wish to give it a look-see the link is https://foldingathome.org/foldinghome-v8-client-guide/?lng=en
 
So I was actually looking at the f@h forums for some API use/guidance when I discovered they have a beta client avial. It's front-end (control) seems to be totally web-based which is good for those of us tired of messin with deprecated python libraries. I'm currently scrounging parts to set up a test bed to offer any feedback not only here, but to the team. Should any of you wish to give it a look-see the link is https://foldingathome.org/foldinghome-v8-client-guide/?lng=en
Nice , checking out the Beta client forum now. :cheers:

I can try this on one of my Linux builds. Checking to see if HFM can work with this, or if Harlam has to do something.
 
Nice thing is, it looks like the new front-end will be able to at least do basic tasks with remote clients. I tried to test that, but then realized the hard way, the particulare VM I run has it's NIC set at "route" instead of "bridge" so I can't hit my real network. Easy fix though :)
 
Looking at the V8 client at F@H, it looks like even if your not going to use the CPU for folding, the client will use all the cores for the CPU folding -1 for use with the GPU.
I think I'll stick with V7, I like the way you can configure it better than what I read at F@H or maybe I read that wrong :)
 
As always, you can set the CPU usage where you like, including 0. I grabbed a shot for reference:
 

Attachments

  • F@H V8 W 0 CPU Cores.PNG
    F@H V8 W 0 CPU Cores.PNG
    35.2 KB · Views: 9
So now it is Thursday, and it has been a couple of days . . . . . .
Has anyone actually used the V8 Client?
If yes, what are your impressions as to whether it is more efficient, or what?
Any differences running on Windows v Linux?
 
Well, I need to secure erase the SSD on one of my ships. I'll set it up with the V8 client and see how it goes. I don't mind being the lab rat :p
 
Well, I need to secure erase the SSD on one of my ships. I'll set it up with the V8 client and see how it goes. I don't mind being the lab rat :p
Hey!
Good to see you around. (y)

Other than running Ubuntu to improve PPD over Windows OS, do you have any knowledge/advice to maximize PPD in Folding?

Personally, I drink good bourbon and don't care as much. :rofl:
 
Last edited:
Hey!
Good to see you around. (y)
Thanks. It turned out the SSD was failing and a quick trip to best buy for a 980 evo pro solved the problem. Leave it to me to build state of the art ships with 10+ year old SSDs :p

Anyway, I have the V8 client running and it seems to be working well enough with some caveats:
1) The web-based monitor works great on localhost, but to hit remote systems you'll have to enable insecure content. I figured it out on chrome, but not on firefox.
2) HFM is not (yet) compatible with the v8 client, so you'll have to use the web utility to monitor/control remote systems.
3) To enable remote control in the first place you'll have to create the config file yourself, which I find odd considering one of the design goals was to simplify this whole thing. I mean it's certianly no big to write a config file. I write http configs what seems like every day but as I said it just seems counter to the simplicity ideal they are aiming for.
(Edited to add) 4) Will not connect to/control the V7 clients.

In time I would like to think the remote control will get ironed out but i guess only time will tell that story.
 
Last edited:
2) HFM is not (yet) compatible with the v8 client, so you'll have to use the web utility to monitor/control remote systems.
I can try this on one of my Linux builds. Checking to see if HFM can work with this, or if Harlam has to do something.

Correct, HFM does not yet support v8. The communication mechanism of the v8 client is using a different protocol.

I've had to put HFM on the back burner since the beginning of the year but I'm going to attempt to find some time to dedicate to it. However, I have already started a partial rewrite and upgrade in the following repo. Since many years ago, I've had a goal of allowing the HFM core to run without the GUI. This repo is focused on that goal. And now that dotnet is a first class citizen on Linux, this will open that door as well with the intention of moving to a web based UI for HFM.

 
A web-based system would totally kick ***. I'll have to have a look-see at your repo If i've not said so: thanks for the work (y)
 
Back