This beta solved the issues with WebApp fieldsuncle_fungus wrote:FahMon 2.3.2beta2 is up: http://fahmon.net/news/archives/2008/01 ... _29_56.txt
FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Moderator: Site Moderators
-
- Site Moderator
- Posts: 6359
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
- Location: Bordeaux, France
- Contact:
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
There might be but I haven't managed it so far. I think wxWidgets is interpreting the switch as a logoff event, which triggers FahMon to close. If I can work out how to separate logoff events from switch user events it should be possible.ICE_9 wrote:Sometimes. I will have to test it again to see if it's working correctly. BTW, is their a way to fix FAHmon from closing when I switch users then switch back, or when I remote in from remote desktop?
Good.toTOW wrote:This beta solved the issues with WebApp fields
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Compiled new beta on Ubuntu 7.10 and all went well. Noticed that on the display the second computer (Atlantis) is showing some of the times from the first computer. Also, the effective time on Challenger1 looks wrong to me but I'm no expert in these things.
FYI
Both running P2653.
-- Challenger1 --
Min. Time / Frame : 7mn 52s - 3221.69 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 7mn 59s - 3174.61 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 14mn 20s - 1768.19 ppd
-- Atlantis --
Min. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 11mn 45s - 2156.94 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 14mn 20s - 1768.19 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 16mn 53s - 1501.13 ppd
The 7mn+ per frame would be nice on Atlantis(E6600) but it's not likely to happen any time soon.
EDIT: I checked the Eff times using the last version of FAHMON and both are much higher on the beta.
FYI
Both running P2653.
-- Challenger1 --
Min. Time / Frame : 7mn 52s - 3221.69 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 7mn 59s - 3174.61 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 14mn 20s - 1768.19 ppd
-- Atlantis --
Min. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
Avg. Time / Frame : 11mn 45s - 2156.94 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
Cur. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 7mn 57s - 3187.92 ppd
R3F. Time / Frame : 11mn 43s - 2163.07 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 14mn 20s - 1768.19 ppd
Eff. Time / Frame : 16mn 53s - 1501.13 ppd
The 7mn+ per frame would be nice on Atlantis(E6600) but it's not likely to happen any time soon.
EDIT: I checked the Eff times using the last version of FAHMON and both are much higher on the beta.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Ooh, that looks like some impressive incompetence on my part, sorry about that.bollix47 wrote:Compiled new beta on Ubuntu 7.10 and all went well. Noticed that on the display the second computer (Atlantis) is showing some of the times from the first computer. Also, the effective time on Challenger1 looks wrong to me but I'm no expert in these things.
The 7mn+ per frame would be nice on Atlantis(E6600) but it's not likely to happen any time soon.
EDIT: I checked the Eff times using the last version of FAHMON and both are much higher on the beta.
The effective times may be affected by a timezone offset bug that I'm looking into at the moment, see here: http://trac.fahmon.net/ticket/87
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Ooh, that looks like some impressive incompetence on my part, sorry about that.
The effective times may be affected by a timezone offset bug that I'm looking into at the moment, see here: http://trac.fahmon.net/ticket/87
I am not using UTC so it's probably the same problem.
If I find anything else I'll check the tickets first.
Thanks for the link.
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
My html output seems wierd.
http://home.orbitelcom.com/cweldridge/stats.html
Mainly because it says 1760 points points.
Do I need to report that as a bug, and how do I do that?
http://home.orbitelcom.com/cweldridge/stats.html
Mainly because it says 1760 points points.
Do I need to report that as a bug, and how do I do that?
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
No, thats fixed in beta2 http://fahmon.net/news/archives/2008/01 ... _29_56.txtICE_9 wrote:My html output seems wierd.
http://home.orbitelcom.com/cweldridge/stats.html
Mainly because it says 1760 points points.
Do I need to report that as a bug, and how do I do that?
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Did 2.3.2b change the method for determining a WU's exact download time? There now seems to be a discrepancy in the reported download time when compared to unitinfo.txt on some WUs, but not all of them.
For example, under 2.3.1, a WU I have running has a reported download date of 4:40AM on January 27. The unitinfo.txt file for that WU matches the time exactly (when accounting for the time zone difference).
Under 2.3.2b2, the same WU has a reported download date of 4:21AM on 1/27.
I just went through all my clients and found the following discrepancies with unitinfo.txt:
Client #1 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2452): 21 minutes
Client #2 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2452): 19 minutes
Client #3 (Linux 6.0b SMP, P2653): None
Client #4 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2451): 19 minutes
Client #5 (WinXP 6.0b console, P3624): None
Client #6 (WinXP 6.0b console, P3615): None
Client #7 (Linux 6.0b single processor, P2453): 18 minutes
Client #8 (Linux 6.0b single processor, P1487): 1 minute
It's not off by much, but I thought I should bring it up. Let me know if you want a bug report filed for this.
This is a separate issue from the time zone offset problem, of course.
For example, under 2.3.1, a WU I have running has a reported download date of 4:40AM on January 27. The unitinfo.txt file for that WU matches the time exactly (when accounting for the time zone difference).
Under 2.3.2b2, the same WU has a reported download date of 4:21AM on 1/27.
I just went through all my clients and found the following discrepancies with unitinfo.txt:
Client #1 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2452): 21 minutes
Client #2 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2452): 19 minutes
Client #3 (Linux 6.0b SMP, P2653): None
Client #4 (WinXP 6.0b console, P2451): 19 minutes
Client #5 (WinXP 6.0b console, P3624): None
Client #6 (WinXP 6.0b console, P3615): None
Client #7 (Linux 6.0b single processor, P2453): 18 minutes
Client #8 (Linux 6.0b single processor, P1487): 1 minute
It's not off by much, but I thought I should bring it up. Let me know if you want a bug report filed for this.
This is a separate issue from the time zone offset problem, of course.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Yes, version 2.3.2 uses the queue file to retrieve that information now. Unitinfo.txt is only used as a fallback for working out the % complete if it's impossible to get that from the logfile.Hyperlife wrote:Did 2.3.2b change the method for determining a WU's exact download time? There now seems to be a discrepancy in the reported download time when compared to unitinfo.txt on some WUs, but not all of them.
It's not off by much, but I thought I should bring it up. Let me know if you want a bug report filed for this.
This is a separate issue from the time zone offset problem, of course.
At the moment FahMon is using the "Issue" time in the queue which is the date that the server sent out the WU. I used this rather than the "begin time" as it gives a better idea of effective PPD because it takes into account the download time too.
You can check the exact values by downloading qd and running it on your queue file. Look for the line that starts with "Issued" for the current queue index and you should see the same discrepancy (in theory).
Code: Select all
[uncle_fungus@Iguana CPU1]$ ./qd | grep issue
issue: Fri Nov 2 11:30:05 2007; begin: Fri Nov 2 11:30:10 2007
issue: Sun Nov 4 04:00:57 2007; begin: Sun Nov 4 04:00:58 2007
issue: Tue Nov 6 18:10:37 2007; begin: Tue Nov 6 18:10:45 2007
issue: Thu Nov 15 08:19:31 2007; begin: Thu Nov 15 08:19:56 2007
issue: Tue Nov 20 13:39:36 2007; begin: Tue Nov 20 13:40:23 2007
issue: Wed Nov 28 16:57:57 2007; begin: Wed Nov 28 16:57:58 2007
issue: Tue Dec 4 16:29:47 2007; begin: Tue Dec 4 16:29:27 2007
issue: Sun Dec 23 08:13:02 2007; begin: Sun Dec 23 08:06:39 2007
issue: Sat Dec 29 05:35:50 2007; begin: Sat Dec 29 05:35:51 2007
issue: Tue Jan 8 20:26:02 2008; begin: Tue Jan 8 20:28:57 2008
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Yup, that explains the difference. Thanks!uncle_fungus wrote:Yes, version 2.3.2 uses the queue file to retrieve that information now. Unitinfo.txt is only used as a fallback for working out the % complete if it's impossible to get that from the logfile.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Can I assume from the lack of comments that the high CPU usage bug(s) and the location corruption bugs are no longer present in the betas?
If so, I've got one more beta to release (which if you're clever you can already download) then it can go public...once I've finished improving the documentation that is
If so, I've got one more beta to release (which if you're clever you can already download) then it can go public...once I've finished improving the documentation that is
-
- Site Moderator
- Posts: 6359
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:38 am
- Location: Bordeaux, France
- Contact:
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
FAHmon beta2 crashed when I finished a p2619 (A2 core) ... (it was a gen 3 WU ... completition was at 400%)
I was unable to restart FAHmon unless it gets a new WU (it got a 2653).
I was unable to restart FAHmon unless it gets a new WU (it got a 2653).
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
Hmm, thats not good. I added some code to try and cope with the % completion issues, which may be the cause, I don't know. The 2619's I've had recently have all been gen 0.toTOW wrote:FAHmon beta2 crashed when I finished a p2619 (A2 core) ... (it was a gen 3 WU ... completition was at 400%)
I was unable to restart FAHmon unless it gets a new WU (it got a 2653).
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:49 pm
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
uncle_fungus wrote:Can I assume from the lack of comments that the high CPU usage bug(s) and the location corruption bugs are no longer present in the betas?
If so, I've got one more beta to release (which if you're clever you can already download) then it can go public...once I've finished improving the documentation that is
I think I have b1 (it might be 2 though), and its working great. I can test b3 or whatever you haven't released to the public if you PM me how.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1288
- Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:37 am
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Re: FahMon (multi-platform app to monitor various F@h clients)
b1 is called FahMon 2.3.2beta, b2 is called FahMon 2.3.2beta2dicecca112{LR} wrote:uncle_fungus wrote:Can I assume from the lack of comments that the high CPU usage bug(s) and the location corruption bugs are no longer present in the betas?
If so, I've got one more beta to release (which if you're clever you can already download) then it can go public...once I've finished improving the documentation that is
I think I have b1 (it might be 2 though), and its working great. I can test b3 or whatever you haven't released to the public if you PM me how.
I'll work out what causing the crash bug toTOW mentioned before putting out beta3