Join the SPCR Folding@Home effort

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 2:35 am

Hello Rusty:

Rusty075 wrote:I've found it very convenient to run F@H as a service on my machines. That way it's running all the time, yet you never even see it. Supposedly since when it's running that way it has alittle faster reaction time to processor cycles becoming available, but I don't know if that makes a measurable difference or not.

Okay, I'll bite: how does one run something as a "service"?

dgouldin · Post by **dgouldin** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 6:01 am

Can anybody else confirm that the command line or service versions are indeed faster? I may try switching over after I finish my current WU.

Post by **Rusty075** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:21 am

Overclockers Australia Folding@Home Service Guide

Ask and ye shall recieve Neil.

dgouldin, I've seen benchmarks that the command line client is 15 to 20% faster. (although I don't have a link to them at the moment) I'm not sure is the service is really any faster than the command line, if it is it's not much faster. The main advantage of running it as a service is that there's no window open, so its not in the way. In fact unless you pull up the Task Manager you have no way of knowing it's een there.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:09 am

Hello David:

dgouldin wrote:Can anybody else confirm that the command line or service versions are indeed faster? I may try switching over after I finish my current WU.

I don't know for sure with the Folding@Home command line client is faster -- but it makes perfect sense if it is. It has no graphics to process!

I do know that the CLI client for SETI@Home is much faster than the GUI client -- it's in the neighborhood of 25% faster! I have run every version of SETI (I started running SETI just 4 days after the project started!), and the most stark example was on an Athlon XP 1800+ (1.53gHz) the v3.03 GUI version ran an average of 5 1/2 hours (I'm going from memory), and the v3.03 CLI version brought that average down to 4h 12m 4s! That's an approximate drop of 24%. With SETI, the CLI client runs all the time, however, so occasionally it slowed things down too much. Folding@Home has the best of both worlds -- the CLI client runs faster, but it backs off when you are using the computer for something else!

Rusty, thanks -- it does require that you run the FireDaemon program, huh? Do you have to reinstall in order to take advatage of this? (I'm guessing that you do!)

dgouldin · Post by **dgouldin** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 9:59 am

I don't know for sure with the Folding@Home command line client is faster -- but it makes perfect sense if it is. It has no graphics to process!

Disputing your logic, not the fact that the console is faster:

Would the graphical client really be slower due to having to process graphics even when it's minimized in the tray? That's where mine usually resides.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:29 am

Hello David:

dgouldin wrote:Would the graphical client really be slower due to having to process graphics even when it's minimized in the tray? That's where mine usually resides.

Yup -- for SETI at least. If you ran graphics, then the speed of your video card came in to play. You could turn off all graphics, and it certainly was a lot faster, but the CLI was faster still. In the example I mentioned above -- the 5.5 hours was with no graphics at all!. I was just using that GUI client to have it "switch itself off" since I was working on the machine in DataCAD, Photoshop, etc.

If I remember correctly, back at the beginning of my using SETI, my K6 333mHz took about 90 hours to process one WU with graphics and about half that with all graphics suppressed. Later on I discovered the CLI client and my times dropped by about 20-25% -- and I had moved on to much faster machines. BTW, running the Windows CLI client in Linux was even faster than in Windows -- but running the Linux client (in Linux!) was slower than the Windows client in Windows...if that's no too confusing.

All this is about the SETI client, but I bet the Folding situation is similar. I think that the calcs required for the graphics still happen -- you are just suppressing the actual display of them. And whatever the reason, the CLI client is faster.

powergyoza · Post by **powergyoza** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:41 am

You don't need FireDaemon to run folding hidden. You can simply run the console as a scheduled task in the control panel. Just add a scheduled task with all the desired switches and you're done. I have 2 clients running @ once so I use -local -advmethods -forceasm.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:53 am

Hello:

powergyoza wrote:You can simply run the console as a scheduled task in the control panel. Just add a scheduled task with all the desired switches and you're done. I have 2 clients running @ once so I use -local -advmethods -forceasm.

What do those switches do? Are they only related to dual CPU's or could they be useful for a single CPU machine? Thanks!

Post by **Rusty075** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 1:59 pm

powergyoza, I tried running it via the scheduled task, but then it comes up just like it was running normally.

The beauty of running it as a service is that there is no console window open. Nothing taking up space on the taskbar, and nothing to accidently close. It runs completely invisibly to the normal user. The only way anybody would know it's there would be to Ctrl-Alt-Del to get the taskmanager up, and then find it in the process window.

Unless I'm doing something wrong with running it via the scheduler? Is there some setting to make it hide the console window? If you want to just have it start everytime windows does it seems simpler to just drag a shortcut to it into the startup folder.

And no, you don't need Firedaemon to install it as a serice, but it is easier. Instructions on how to do it manually can be found here: http://www.overclockers.com.au/folding/ ... 2000xp.htm

fmah · Post by **fmah** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 5:39 pm

I keep running the console but it keep erroring. I guess I will try back to the GUI and see if I can get the 2nd WU.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 6:47 pm

Hello:

fmah wrote:I keep running the console but it keep erroring. I guess I will try back to the GUI and see if I can get the 2nd WU.

What is the error? Is it a program crash, or is it a connection problem getting a work unit? And what OS are you using?

powergyoza · Post by **powergyoza** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 6:49 pm

Rusty075 wrote:powergyoza, I tried running it via the scheduled task, but then it comes up just like it was running normally.

Rusty075, most of the time the console windows do not appear on the desktop nor is there an icon for it on the taskbar. For the times that the window does show up, I use HideIt to make it disappear.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 6:58 pm

Hello:

I'm using Win2K SP2 and I tried the "scheduled task" method in several ways (start upon sign in, and start when idle) and neither worked at all. Nothing started at all -- I had set the "advanced" settings to start after just 1 minute of being idle, and I waited 2-3 minutes and -- nothing happened!

So for now, I'll just keep running the CLI as a Start Up shortcut -- I need to be able to look at it to check it's progress before rebooting and such, so mig beal!

dgouldin · Post by **dgouldin** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:55 pm

Where did you get SP2? I didn't think it was out yet. Did you download a release candidate?

Post by **Rusty075** » Wed Apr 16, 2003 8:21 pm

Hmm Powergyoza, maybe I'm just doing it wrong. Or maybe it's because you're running 2 instances of it? I dunno, doesn't really matter anyways. As long as it's running that's all that counts

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Thu Apr 17, 2003 2:36 am

Hello David:

dgouldin wrote:Where did you get SP2? I didn't think it was out yet. Did you download a release candidate?

You may be thinking about WinXP -- for Win2K there is actually an SP3, which I am avoiding because I have heard that it can "break" your installation, making it unbootable -- and also the EULA is pretty onorous! A lot like the EULA in WinXP, actually...

dgouldin · Post by **dgouldin** » Thu Apr 17, 2003 5:56 am

Yeah I was ... excuse my haste ... it's that same engineer's inclination that keeps all my user's manuals in their plastic wrapping.

Lithium · Post by **Lithium** » Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:33 pm

[04:32:15] + Attempting to get work packet
[04:32:15] - Connecting to assignment server
[04:32:15] - Couldn't send HTTP request to server
[04:32:15] + Could not connect to Assignment Server
[04:32:15] - Couldn't send HTTP request to server
[04:32:15] + Could not connect to Assignment Server 2
[04:32:15] + Couldn't get work instructions.
[04:32:15] - Error: Getwork #6 failed, and no other work to do. Waiting before r
etry

hrmmm what the

Post by **Rusty075** » Thu Apr 17, 2003 8:37 pm

Lithium, are you connecting through a firewall? In the config make your sure have it set to use internet explorer proxy settings. See if that helps.

Post by **NeilBlanchard** » Fri Apr 18, 2003 2:31 am

Hello:

This seems to be an issue with some of the F@H servers -- I think I was stuck at 2 units for a week and a half, even though I had completed 5 or 6. In the end, you DO get credit! It also seems to (possibly) be what happens just after you have started F@H -- maybe the software changes servers until it "finds" one that works better? Because since that 5th ot 6th unit, I have not had this problem at all.

So, please be patient and please persist -- you'll jump up in the ratings in a little while!

powergyoza · Post by **powergyoza** » Fri Apr 18, 2003 10:57 am

NeilBlanchard wrote:Hello:

I'm using Win2K SP2 and I tried the "scheduled task" method in several ways (start upon sign in, and start when idle) and neither worked at all. Nothing started at all -- I had set the "advanced" settings to start after just 1 minute of being idle, and I waited 2-3 minutes and -- nothing happened!

I have mine set up to start upon system startup. Did you give that a try?

crisspy · Post by **crisspy** » Fri Apr 18, 2003 6:32 pm

Joins the team...

acidradio · Post by **acidradio** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 7:40 am

joined the team... first post as well!

ez2remember · Post by **ez2remember** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:04 am

Just joined the team, I downloaded the screen saver version.

Please can someone answer these questions:

1) Does it fold when I am not in the screen saver? It appears no folding takes place on my comp.

2) Which version is the most optimised for folding? Non graphic version?

3) I would like it to fold all the time, how do I set this up?

Thanx in advance.

wussboy · Post by **wussboy** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:33 am

acidradio wrote:joined the team... first post as well!

Welcome to the forum and the team, Acidradio.

wussboy · Post by **wussboy** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:39 am

ez2remember wrote:Just joined the team, I downloaded the screen saver version.

Please can someone answer these questions:

1) Does it fold when I am not in the screen saver? It appears no folding takes place on my comp.

2) Which version is the most optimised for folding? Non graphic version?

3) I would like it to fold all the time, how do I set this up?

Thanx in advance.

1. I would download the first one from the download page (the one that is recommended).

2. The summation of this thread seems to be that the non-graphic version is much faster.

3. Which brings me to point 3, which is that if you run the regular graphic client (download option 1), it just sits in your system tray and runs all the time. It will set itself up to load at startup, so you never have to think about it again (other than making sure you sign in and that your WUs are being sent to SPCR). It will automatically just eat up your spare CPU cycles.

I hope that helps. Mainly I'm just telling you my own experience. I've installed it on a friend's computer (with permission) and I'll likely never visit his house or use his computer for months, but it will just keep ticking over, accessing the internet when it needs to and otherwise just making itself invisible.

Lithium · Post by **Lithium** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:33 am

I haven't gotten a signle work unit to register since I've switch to the CLI. And now it's doing frames 100-350 I've tried erasing the work directory but it still climbs above 100

/sigh

herosformula · Post by **herosformula** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:56 am

On my current work unit, there are 394 total frames. My guess is that this number is different for each WU based on the types and quantity of protein structures placed into the workunit by the experiment leader.

Post by **Rusty075** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 1:21 pm

Yeah, the work units vary in the number of frames they have, from 100 to 600. The longer work units give you (and the team) more points. So don't worry, the program will know when its done and will send the unit back and get a fresh one to work on.

crisspy · Post by **crisspy** » Sun Apr 20, 2003 7:00 pm

Well, I got the recommended graphic client, and so far my machine has done 2.4 work units in about 37 hours (shut down by accident for a night). I don't notice it running, but my CPU is up from 44°c to 48°c

so I know it's doing something... I'ts good to finally have an excuse to leave it on 24/7.

XP1700, 256MB, CudaIV/40

Join the SPCR Folding@Home effort

setting up a service?

I'm pretty sure the command line version is much faster!

What is the error?

"scheduled task" didn't work for me

I'm using Windows 2000!

Ya gotta be patient!

Re: "scheduled task" didn't work for me