| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
| World Community Grid Forums
|
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 6
|
|
| Author |
|
|
tekennelly
Cruncher Joined: Oct 10, 2005 Post Count: 45 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I set priority and affinity for all WCG projects hourly. I have noticed that even though I set GFAM at Below Normal on Win 7 within 5 or so minutes it will be reset to Low priority.
I do not believe the other WCG science projects do this and I would rather that GFAM not set its priority except when a new work unit is initiated. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
GFAM, not GRAM is a 2 part application, a stager and worker. A new worker is started with each job in a task. There can be 8-10, there can be well over 100. Depends on what the task builder decides are heavy and light.
----------------------------------------As to your believes, CEP2 and DSFL do that too. ;O) --//-- P.S. *ALL* sciences of BOINC, at WCG and elsewhere run in lowest priority. It's hardcoded, so setting higher priority will have next to no effect. If it does have effect for you, great, but not recommended. The design is to back off if anything higher needs cycles. [Edit 1 times, last edit by Former Member at Nov 22, 2011 7:26:11 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Maybe if you set the priority and affinity on the stager app, that remains loaded for the full run, will the worker inhered the setting, or you could try Process Lasso. That will do it for you, automated, but you risk the consequence that if e.g. 3 of GFAM on a quad are running and you set the affinity to core 2 and 3 for the science, that you get 2 jobs running on 1 core. BOINC could not care and Process Lasso just follows instructions. The difference between elapsed and CPU time will become huge IIRC when I was experimenting with it to get HPF2 to always run on core 3 (Q6600).
--//-- |
||
|
|
tekennelly
Cruncher Joined: Oct 10, 2005 Post Count: 45 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks for all of the information.
BTW I would set all science projects at a BelowNormal priority and a unique affinity. The reason I choose BelowNormal was to allow for the case that when one science project stopped and another started the new process would start at Low priority with affinity set to all processors but would usually run on the one processor that was not used by the other science processes. In other words, when a new science project starts at low then it can not interfere with the unique affinities set for the other projects because it was set to Low priority and cannot run compete with the other projects running at BelowNormal priorities with affinity for their processors. |
||
|
|
Ingleside
Veteran Cruncher Norway Joined: Nov 19, 2005 Post Count: 974 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Thanks for all of the information. BTW I would set all science projects at a BelowNormal priority and a unique affinity. The reason I choose BelowNormal was to allow for the case that when one science project stopped and another started the new process would start at Low priority The science-thread isn't running on Low priority, it runs on Idle priority. Setting the process-priority to BelowNormal has zero effect, since any thread running at Idle priority is only affected if the process-priority is increased to real-time, and you definitely don't want to run it as real-time. While you can use Task Manager and similar to set the process-priority, you can't use Task Manager to set individual thread-priorities. (most WCG-processes has atleast 2 threads). with affinity set to all processors but would usually run on the one processor that was not used by the other science processes. In other words, when a new science project starts at low then it can not interfere with the unique affinities set for the other projects because it was set to Low priority and cannot run compete with the other projects running at BelowNormal priorities with affinity for their processors. Locking the affinity can have unexpected effects, since atleast back in the days I ran SETI "classic" any newly-started application that was allowed to use all cpus had a bad habit of choosing the cpu there the affinity-locked process was already running, and in the process leaving a cpu idle. But granted this was with win2k, so hopefully later OS has gotten better cpu-scheduler. ![]() "I make so many mistakes. But then just think of all the mistakes I don't make, although I might." [Edit 1 times, last edit by Ingleside at Nov 26, 2011 8:47:36 PM] |
||
|
|
sk..
Master Cruncher http://s17.rimg.info/ccb5d62bd3e856cc0d1df9b0ee2f7f6a.gif Joined: Mar 22, 2007 Post Count: 2324 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
High priority also increases some app performances, slightly, but everything else is negligible to zero. Real Time should absolutely never be used under any circumstances! Affinity can also improve performance, somewhat, at times, but can also negatively influence performance. The big negative is responsiveness - so definitely not recommended, especially on high core/thread count systems.
|
||
|
|
|