Multiple Systray Clients

E

Escher

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 9, 2000
Messages
496
According to some on the F@H forums, you can in fact run multiple Systray clients on the same machine. I've got a quad-core that I'd love to maximize usage of without having to dick around with the SMP client.

I've tried all the reasonable approaches, different install folders, different start in and target folders, different machine IDs, etc. But every time I start my 2nd client, my 1st client shuts down. Log file indicates different machine IDs and paths, so that seems set up correctly.

Any ideas?

Machine is running Vista x64 if that matters or helps.
 
I would skip the system tray client and run the console client, everything ends up in one folder and no BS
 
OldGuru said:
I would skip the system tray client and run the console client, everything ends up in one folder and no BS
Click to expand...
Hey Viper666, what's up?

I haven't tried multiple systray clients other than the GPU systray clients, they work together just fine. If making sure your not using duplicate machine ID #s doesn't allow them to work together without conflicts, then OldGuru's suggestion may be best. Personally, I like the systray clients.
 
I prefer the systray clients as it keeps my desktop/task tray neater. However, none of the directions you've graciously provided seem to work on my machine. The 2nd client started always causes the first client to shut down.
 
If you use the console clients, you can setup all as services ;)

 
Haha ... yeah, but then I don't have that nifty pause ability. I don't run the clients 100% of the time and it's just easier to interact with something when it has an easily accessible GUI.
 
I think I may have figured out the problem. I noticed in one of the links that I should turn on the "Do not lock cores to specific CPU" option. I did that, and though it still seems to sometimes kill another running instance, every now and then it'll allow them both to run.
 
Escher said:
I think I may have figured out the problem. I noticed in one of the links that I should turn on the "Do not lock cores to specific CPU" option. I did that, and though it still seems to sometimes kill another running instance, every now and then it'll allow them both to run.
Click to expand...
Interesting, I've never seen a situation where one client affects the other in the manner you described. Does each client have unique machine IDs?
 
Yes, each client has it's own unique ID. I'm starting to think the problem relates to the core executables that the client kicks off to do the actual folding. Since those are not uniquely named, perhaps the conflict resides with them. Like I said earlier, I'm getting them to run now, but not very reliably. Sometimes when I start one, it kills another that's using the same named core EXE, other times it kicks off without incident.

Truthfully, as a software developer, I'm really surprised that after so long the software is as temperamental as it appears to be. I've heard they have problems with their SMP client, and maybe my troubles with the uniprocessor client relate. Seems they need better skilled software developers working on the project as multi-core/multi-CPU processing is not something new. With an application of this nature, you'd think parallelization would be almost trivial. But I digress ...
 
Escher said:
Yes, each client has it's own unique ID. I'm starting to think the problem relates to the core executables that the client kicks off to do the actual folding. Since those are not uniquely named, perhaps the conflict resides with them. Like I said earlier, I'm getting them to run now, but not very reliably. Sometimes when I start one, it kills another that's using the same named core EXE, other times it kicks off without incident.
Click to expand...
I don't think the executable names are the problem, I have run as many as 5 SMP clients concurrently with identical executable names and that didn't pose any problem. I'd imagine the GPU executables to be the same in that respect. Your crashes are caused by something else, I'm certain of it.

Truthfully, as a software developer, I'm really surprised that after so long the software is as temperamental as it appears to be. I've heard they have problems with their SMP client, and maybe my troubles with the uniprocessor client relate. Seems they need better skilled software developers working on the project as multi-core/multi-CPU processing is not something new. With an application of this nature, you'd think parallelization would be almost trivial. But I digress ...
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not the one best to reply about this particular concern because I'm not a programmer, but quite a few other members here have made their opinions made known about this, and quite blatantly I might add. It has been an ongoing issue for quite some time the way I understand it.
 
After thinking about this I recall there being an issue with the system tray client,because it wrote the config file to the windows reg. 2 clients would read that same entry so both clients had the same ID, the -local flag used to fix it, but I was reciently told that flag isnt used in the ver 6 clients, sorry i can be more helpful !


"Hey Viper666, what's up?" notta
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top