On 08-Dec-2010 3:07 PM, Bernd Machenschalk wrote:
> If I understand correctly, the CPU capabilities are reported by recent clients
> in in the scheduler request.
> 1. This tag was added with a certain version of the BOINC client, right? Do
> you
> happen to know in which version this was intro
Although v6.2 and above have been around for a long time, well over two
years, some issues like http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/ticket/652 render it
unusable on certain hosts.
> My last message was wrong.
> Clients before 6.2 (early 2008) didn't know about plan class;
> they assumed app version
My last message was wrong.
Clients before 6.2 (early 2008) didn't know about plan class;
they assumed app versions are uniquely identified by
(app, version) rather than (app, version, plan class)
Hence the scheduler only sends app versions with no plan class
(i.e., single-CPU app versions) to such
work buffer sizes would be calculated from the statistics
of network availability;
details are yet to be determined; suggestions welcome.
-- David
On 09-Dec-2010 9:09 AM, john.mcl...@sybase.com wrote:
> I have been thinking about "Extra work". I don't see how to calculate this
> from data. Could
I have been thinking about "Extra work". I don't see how to calculate this
from data. Could you give us a hint on how this would be calculated
automatically?
jm7
David Anderson
We should have a discussion about what each of the three standard sets of
settings are.
Does the checkpoint interval really want to be dynamic?
The items currently on the static list really cannot be dynamic.
The following could be either static or dynamic; I'd prefer to make them
static.
Me too:
On 09/12/10 12:55, Ian Hay wrote:
> David Anderson wrote on 08/12/2010 22:35:
>> http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/PrefsRemodel
>>
>> This isn't something we're going to do anytime soon,
>> but we may as well discuss it.
>
> That page asks if anyone uses the following.
>
> * CPU
Hi David!
I do like the idea of having a couple of predefined sets of settings
that one can easily select.
Something that bothers me since the early days of BOINC is the
inconsistency of which preferences can be set via web / manager / client
(command-line or files) and possibly account manage
There was a spam post in exactly the same thread a couple of days ago. I
asked Kathryn to deal with it, which she did. This could just be a
coincidence.
Mo
___
boinc_dev mailing list
boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu
http://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listin
David Anderson wrote on 08/12/2010 22:35:
> http://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/PrefsRemodel
>
> This isn't something we're going to do anytime soon,
> but we may as well discuss it.
That page asks if anyone uses the following.
* CPU scheduling period
Yes. One malariacontrol.net applicatio
Done.
- Rom
-Original Message-
From: boinc_dev-boun...@ssl.berkeley.edu
[mailto:boinc_dev-boun...@ssl.berkeley.edu] On Behalf Of Richard
Haselgrove
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 1:06 PM
To: BOINC Developers Mailing List
Subject: [boinc_dev] Spammer
There's a spammer active on the
There's a spammer active on the BOINC message board, and Ageless is away.
Anyone around with the power to banish the account?
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dev/forum_thread.php?id=5841&nowrap=true#36008
___
boinc_dev mailing list
boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu
Dear David,
The new proposal seems OK for me. I think that the major problem with
the BOINC client is the user interface. The user has too many options,
and some of them are difficult to understand. One approach to solve
this, is what we have now about simple and advance view but also
related to t
On 09.12.10 10:07, Bernd Machenschalk wrote:
> On 08.12.10 18:28, David Anderson wrote:
>> 1) plan class is purely a server mechanism;
>> it's relevant to all client versions.
>> If an app_plan function references info that's only
>> reported by certain clients (e.g., GPU list or CPU capabilities)
On 08.12.10 18:28, David Anderson wrote:
> 1) plan class is purely a server mechanism;
> it's relevant to all client versions.
> If an app_plan function references info that's only
> reported by certain clients (e.g., GPU list or CPU capabilities)
> then it will return false (i.e. that app version
15 matches
Mail list logo
