Index  | Recent Threads  | Unanswered Threads  | Who's Active  | Guidelines  | Search
 

Quick Go ยป
No member browsing this thread
Thread Status: Active
Total posts in this thread: 4
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread
Author
Previous Thread This topic has been viewed 428 times and has 3 replies Next Thread
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
ok to have long "write to disk" intervals?

In BOINC 5.10.28, on "disk and memory usage" tab, can I use a longer "write to disk" interval time, say 300 or 600 seconds? I have been using interval of 60 seconds. Will longer waits force BOINC to fill up the RAM with results and constrict the processing for intensive tasks? Thanks, KB.
[Jan 15, 2008 10:48:42 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
Post Count: 20043
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: ok to have long "write to disk" intervals?

That's perfectly fine and you can up it to 999 seconds which is about 17 minutes. The effect is though that any checkpoint save writing is delayed to the next one occurring after the write delay interval, but, what is 5 or 10 minutes of computing time loss when a system is stopped/restarted?

Added: And no it has no effect on memory use. Any checkpoint occurring during the delay is simply skipped. The science works on the basis of: Can i write a checkpoint *now* when its scheduled to do one and the client talking back with yes or no. The 60 seconds is default for BOINC. Some projects write a checkpoint very frequent and others few. See Start Here forum for checkpoint saving for more information.
----------------------------------------
WCG Global & Research > Make Proposal Help: Start Here!
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All!
[Jan 15, 2008 11:04:45 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Former Member
Cruncher
Joined: May 22, 2018
Post Count: 0
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: ok to have long "write to disk" intervals?

Thanks Sekerob. Are longer intervals "better" than shorter ones? So what happens at "write to disk" interval checkpoints? I was trying to optimize BOINC, not hurt its performance, while still allowing me to use the machine for everyday foreground tasks. I have upped the performance by just turning off the screen saver and increasing memory allotment and increasing CPU share to 60 percent. -- KB
[Jan 15, 2008 11:10:02 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
Sekerob
Ace Cruncher
Joined: Jul 24, 2005
Post Count: 20043
Status: Offline
Reply to this Post  Reply with Quote 
Re: ok to have long "write to disk" intervals?

Less disk i/o is better performance. Particular if checkpoint saves are large will it effect overall wallclock time for a work unit and *could* it be noticeable on lower end machines. The key is oodles of RAM else on large workunits would there be substantial Ram to swapfile i/o. Just look at what the maximum ram use is for a project and set the work and idle to a level that it does not impair regular use. The more ram allocated to BOINC sciences, the better.

The BOINC screensaver, if it works, has an option to go blank after x minutes. This allows to show off the picture to the interested for a few minutes and after goes off for maximum idle while crunching while idle.
----------------------------------------
WCG Global & Research > Make Proposal Help: Start Here!
Please help to make the Forums an enjoyable experience for All!
----------------------------------------
[Edit 1 times, last edit by Sekerob at Jan 15, 2008 11:28:01 AM]
[Jan 15, 2008 11:26:33 AM]   Link   Report threatening or abusive post: please login first  Go to top 
[ Jump to Last Post ]
Post new Thread