The next batch of results will be available for you. I've fixed memory bound, there was 256 MB so I changed it to 64 MB.

Thank you so much for your response AND your accommodation. My little old laptop will crunch away for you, as soon as it can. Best Regards, Rick

---

Should the 64 MB modification you made be in force yet? My Little laptop attempted to get an Asteriods WU today and still got the reply, "Period Search Application needs 244.14 MB RAM, but only 127.49 MB is available for use." a second attempt by BOINC got this response, "Period Search Application needs 476.84 MB RAM, but only 127.49 MB is available for use.". Should I still be unable to crunch with my little (and very old) laptop? Please let me know.
Rick

---

Try tommorow, there are still some results with old settings in the beggining of the queue.

Just a thought ... I had this problem when adding a new project (POGS) to a pc that already had multiple projects running. I had to increase the 'disk and memory usage' (Tools | Computing Preferences). I changed the 'use at most' allocation from 10Gb to 14Gb and was able to download the new project wu's. I was running CPDN, Asteroids, WCG, and T4T, so they had taken up the majority of the disk space in wu's and project files stored locally.

Although my problem was regarding disk space, maybe you can look at your memory usage settings and see if you can tweak something on the laptop?! Hope that helps!

---

Hope that helps!

Every post I see on any forum that ends with "Hope that helps" as usual do not help at all.

You can't "tweak something" if you have "VERY old Sony notebook (263MHz, 128MB Ram)" (you can't set it to 'use 200% of RAM', can you?)
and "Period Search Application needs 244.14 MB RAM but only 127.49 MB is available for use."
(this is already fixed to 'needs 64 MB' by the admin)

Did you read the previous posts?

---

- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)

?? Geez BilBg, thanks for the incredibly enlightening post ... did the dog shred your favorite slippers or are you always this rude?? I'll refrain from a similar response.

The thread is “Application for Windows”, not “Rick’s old laptop memory issue”. I read the posts, including the last one where Kyong says to “try tomorrow”. Rick didn't provide an update. Otherwise I wouldn't have posted anything I didn't feel worthwhile to Rick, this topic, or similar topics regarding disk space and memory allocations. If it doesn't help Rick, it may help others. That was the purpose of my post. And yes, you can tweak settings on every computer, so I don’t understand your point. Most people run with the defaults and haven’t ever actually tried tweaking their system for optimal performance.

If you don't have anything constructive to add, I suggest you keep your discourteous comments to yourself - there's no need for it here or any other volunteer project forum.

Have a nice day!

?? Geez BilBg, thanks for the incredibly enlightening post ... did the dog shred your favorite slippers or are you always this rude??

Nah, he's been reading too many of my posts and it's rubbing off on him ;-)

If you don't have anything constructive to add

Well, see, that's the point. Your comments about tweaking the settings were not very constructive to begin with because they are so completely wrong, wrong not just for the laptop in question but wrong for any host, wrong for all of computerdom. Yes, we all know you only wanted to help but bad advice is rampant. You see BilBG understands BOINC and computing pretty much inside out and he tries to help too but he also sees people taking up bad advice such as yours and believing it and then it turns up in some other thread where people have tried to make your advice work and it's failed. That doesn't sit well with BilBg, I suspect, and I can sympathize with him/her totally. But I sympathize with you too.

I spent years learning the craft, first on FidoNet (before Internet was available to most of us), then the froops (Usenet/newsgroups), then Internet mailing lists and now finally Web based forums like this. Trust me, you forget polite remarks and offer the same bad advice again later, been there done it seen it a million times. Somebody like BilBg whacks you then you remember it for a while and think next time before you hammer out the first thought that pops into your mind. You pause and think and check see if your advice is correct. Not saying I'm always right either, just saying don't take it personal, understand the frustration BilBg might feel too and learn from it.

If this situation had occurred in a newsgroup you would be roundly ridiculed by several others for giving the advice you did and for your retort booed into total submission, sent back to the minor league, relegated to the porch where the old dogs and pups sit and watch. An "oops! I goofed" gets respect, cry baby retorts do not.

If it doesn't help Rick, it may help others.

No, it won't help anybody, anywhere, not ever. Because it was total garbage.

Ok, I went and read BilBg's other comments and found him to be technically savvy with well constructed posts. I've also enjoyed reading your comments here and other forums. Point made. I can see that my post was not relevant or helpful to the immediate topic of discussion (RAM buffer), but I don't understand how my post was 'garbage' otherwise?!

I've crunched since Seti Classic, and enjoy Boinc. How can you tell me I was wrong about tweaking work buffer, processor usage, disk space allocation, memory allocation, or any other setting that can be changed? I'm curious, not being ignorant, I just don't see how my post was so horrible, except for the fact that it wouldn't pertain to Rick's immediate issue, and that Kyong had indeed found and corrected the problem on the backend.

You can PM me, we don't have to clog up this thread. Although I do try test projects, I don't post very often in forums, and I'm not on the technical level of you and BilBg regarding Boinc. Sorry if you felt my post was garbage.

Thank you for the kind words.

How can you tell me I was wrong about tweaking work buffer, processor usage, disk space allocation, memory allocation, or any other setting that can be changed?

Because tweaking those settings wouldn't fix the problem he was having. From other parts of your post I gathered you came to understand that so I'm a little surprised that you are asking that question. Or perhaps I don't understand your question.

I'm curious, not being ignorant, I just don't see how my post was so horrible

It wasn't horrible and I should not have used the word "garbage". I apologize for that. I use it a lot in other circles to describe people's posts/efforts/work and they use it to describe mine and nobody is offended in those circles. There it is perfectly acceptable but here I should know better. There it simply means "not very good" and we use it for sake of brevity.

Ok, I went and read BilBg's other comments and found him to be technically savvy with well constructed posts.

Thanks

I just didn't like "Hope that helps" ;)
(I have seen this many times. For me it sounds like "I said what I wanted to say, it probably will be of no use for you but 'Hope that helps'")

E.g.:
Q: My Windows started to BSOD often, how to fix? Help!
A: Format your HDD and install clean Windows. Or buy new computer. For me that works. Hope that helps.

I've crunched since Seti Classic ...

My main comments are there:
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/forum_user_posts.php?userid=8647488

---

- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)

Dagorath wrote:

Given the CPU speed your other concern would be deadline. It looks to be 14 days so I would say there's a good chance you would be able to complete one. DCF for this project is close to 1 on my hosts so tasks are giving good duration estimates here. Usually that means if the scheduler figures it'll be OK it usually is.

What are you seeing for DCF now? Mine was about 1 and the estimated duration was about correct. With the latest batch of WU, the estimated duration is in the 17 to 20 minute range on my machines but they're taking about 5 - 6 hours to complete. The GFLOPS estimate (31501) on the current WU which begin with ps_130122_98 is much lower than the previous WUs. I wish I had written down the GFLOPS estimate on an old WU when I first noticed this and still had one but I just thought something (maybe a command from the server) had reset the DCF to 1 on my crunching machines (mostly C2Q Q6600s). IIRC, the old GFLOPS estimate was at least one or 2 digits longer and began with "18".

I'm running BOINC 7.0.28 on Vista 32 bits on all the machines. My one Vista 64 bit machine (another Q6600 quad) has been down for a disk failure. It even fails the short test in S.M.A.R.T.. Since 32 bits is no longer enough, I'm going to be doing some OS upgrades to 64 bit soon - have more memory on order and already bought Win7 pro (full version) for one machine and the cheap Win8 upgrade for another. I think the Win8 upgrade will let me switch a machine from 32 to 64 bits if it sees the valid Vista installation or I give it the number from the Vista certificate HP stuck on the box. All the quads are HP boxes which came with Vista pre-loaded. I'm also planning to upgrade a machine from Vista to the latest CentOS Linux version so I can do some server software development and testing locally.

Are you seeing the same DCF and time estimate problem on recent WUs?

---

David Ball

Hi David,

I haven't actually checked the DCF but I know it will be way different because the duration estimates are way off and have been for a few days. The bad estimates issue was raised in another thread, please see Kyong's response in that thread if you haven't already.

@ [B^S] ShanerX: believe what Dagorath and BilBg say. I've learned to listen to them and do as they say. They are pro's.

About this... hope that helps!!!

Lol lol lol

problem for connection in nord italy local server closed of international server ,morning i have open the pc another work memory ,ghost, that?? hello my friends