That's a good idea. I'd been thinking about something similar. What I was thinking was to eliminate the preference, and just change things so that if non-BOINC CPU usage is X, BOINC will use at most NCPUs - X. -- David
On 26-Jul-2010 2:37 PM, Sean White wrote: > David, > > > I’ve been a longtime BIONC fan, and had an ‘enhancement’ suggestion with > respect to the ‘cpu usuage’ exceeds ‘parameter’ feature. Instead of > shutting down the entire set of processess when the cpu usage exceeds a > threshold, it would make more sense to roll back usage 1 CPU at a time. > > If a computer has Y CPU’s available for use, and the ‘other process > usage’ parameter is set to value X, then when Non-BIONC Usage /Y > X for > a minimum time interval ‘T’, then we freeze one BIONC process, freeing 1 > CPU to manage the non-BIONC tasks. The next trip occurs when Non-BIONC > usage / Y > (1/Y+X). (I.e. when the non-BIONC tasks load up the 1 CPU > and start impinging on the 2^nd CPU, we drop the second CPU out). I > would suggest that a reasonable ‘drop out time’ is 1s or so? (whatever > is currently used). > > This approach would eliminate the annoying ‘entire BIONC all tasks > offline’ event which I encounter when multiple tasks happen to end at > the same time, or when you open another application that happens to need > all of 1 CPU briefly to get going. > > Cheers, > > > Sean W. > _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
