Which Linux?

[citroja]

Hello to all of you Linux users out there!!

  I am somewhat familiar with Linux (but it has been a while).  At one point or another I ran SUSE 8,9, and 10 and REDHAT 4??  I am looking to get back to using Linux but I was wondering if one version or another was recommended for S@H and BOINC performance (faster ).

  I currently have disks for SUSE 10 (32 and 64bit) and I should still have the SUSE 9 disks kicking around.  For the convienience factor I am leaning towards SUSE but I would like to hear what others have to say about Linux builds. 

  If there are benchmarks that are available please let me know.

Thanks
Citroja

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello!

Iīm a Windows user, but I would like to take now Suse LINUX 10.1- 64 Bit.

So I donīt know about LINUX...

But I had a thread here about Windows or LINUX...

And maybe you can help me with my problem...

Greetings!

[Simon]

Dirk, you mentioned some error messages.

Can you post them, maybe? Use the typewriter symbol in the editor to make a preformatted field, then paste it in there like

thirteen:~# free
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        256664     253216       3448          0      51988      84452
-/+ buffers/cache:     116776     139888
Swap:      1204864       3804    1201060
thirteen:~#

Because otherwise formatting of shell error messages just sucks.

Thanks, that would really help in tracking down your problem.

HTH,
Simon.

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello Simon!

Thanks for your support!

I would like only to test the 64 Bit Boinc and S@H app to look to the performance...

The error messages are only like:
Cannot find file... and so on...
I cannot explain correct now...

I was in the "Console with instructions" (Konsole) I name it like this...
And then I wrote: sux
And then I had to write my root PIN
And then I wrote: yast -i /home/username/folder/boinc_5.4.9_opteron-64-linux-gnu
Then the "Console" was changed the color and the design and after a few seconds:
The file boinc_5.4.9_opteron-64-linux-gnu cannot be found... or like this... press OK

I cannot remember correct now...

Maybe I find little time later or I will do it again latest at Thursday...
So I know it better the messages...

But I think Iīm the problem...

Greetings!

EDIT:
I was looking here to find some infos:
http://de.opensuse.org/SDB:Programme_unter_SuSE_Linux_installieren
Point 10 and then 4...
But it does not help me...
And I cannot find the program "KPackage"

[Simon]

Well,

just don't use YAST then

The instructions I posted in the other thread should work, and not require yast. The package Stefan Urbat made is not a SUSE package, so you cannot install it with YAST. Rather, you unpack it somewhere, then run it. Go to the directory where you downloaded the archive to, then do this in a console or shell window:

Code: [Select]

mkdir BOINC   # make a directory for BOINC
cd BOINC  # go into it
tar xfvj ../boinc5.4.9seti5.13-linux-x86_64.tar.bz2  # unpack the archive
mv boinc_5.4.9_opteron-64-linux-gnu boinc   # rename BOINC binary

Then you can use the rest of my instructions in the other thread about how to attach and run BOINC.

If you get warnings/errors about missing libraries, please post them here as well, and we'll get you fixed up.

Regards,
Simon.

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello Simon!

Thanks a lot for your support!

I will do it like you said!
Maybe I will do it very soon...

Then, of course, I will inform you!

Greetings!

[citroja]

Ok so this got a little bit off topic...but no big deal someone got questions answered

anyways I was looking aroung the S@H forums and it appears the SUSE and Debian are two fo the more popular Linux build...so unless i hear otherwise I will probably SUSE (because I have the CDs/DVDs)

let me know if anyone has anything else to say

citroja

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello Simon!

Again, thanks a lot for your support!

...after a few hours...
4...
In letters...
four itīs running now...

I donīt know, why? And I donīt know how, but itīs nice!
Iīm very happy!

And now I have a few questions:

When we look now to the Infos of the "old" and now the "new" PC:

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP
Home Edition, Service Pack 2, (05.01.2600.00)
Memory 767.48 MB
Cache 976.56 KB

Operating System Linux
2.6.16.13-4-default   (itīs the 64 Bit, but it does not stand here (there)?!)
Memory 752.36 MB
Cache  512 KB

Now I have less Memory (15,12 MB) and less (Cache 464,56 KB)
The Memory is because of the LINUX I think and the half Cache now because of the 64 Bit, correct?

When I remember correct, Windows used around 200 MB (S@H ~64 MB?), now with LINUX around 635 MB (S@H ~65- 80 MB?)!
Because in the LINUX- KDE- system-monitoring device: VmGröße= 80 MB oder VmRss= 65 MB?
This is normal with Suse LINUX? Or I can close/ delete some services?

The priority is from -20 (high) to +19 (low).
The S@H app have +19.
Can I turn here a little bit for more performance?
S@H becomes only max. 93% CPU dispatching, a programm with the name X becomes the rest...


Is there a programm to control the CPU- temperature under Suse LINUX?


Greetings!

PS. Now I think... the optimized app is a SSE2, or?
Or itīs different with 64 Bit?

[Dirk Sadowski]

... I was looking aroung the S@H forums and it appears the SUSE and Debian are two fo the more popular Linux build...so unless i hear otherwise I will probably SUSE (because I have the CDs/DVDs)

let me know if anyone has anything else to say

citroja

Hello!

Now I have installed Suse LINUX 10.1- 64 Bit on my AMD K8 3200+...

Greetings!

[Simon]

Basically, you could run it without Xwindows and KDE - that would make Seti@Home get lots more CPU.
Then you would only have a text console, but that of course uses a lot less RAM as well.

As for the cache issue, I wouldn't believe what some programs say - instead use this:

Code: [Select]

cat /proc/cpuinfo
in a console to find out what your CPU supports and how much cache is detected. 64-bit operating systems do not have anything to do with cache size.

Also, I'm not sure you are running 64-bit Linux - did you install SUSE from the AMD64 installation discs or i386/i686 ones? The kernel you list does not specifically say anything about 64-bit. You could find out more by

Code: [Select]

uname -a

thirteen:~# uname -a
Linux thirteen 2.4.27-3-k7 #1 Tue May 30 00:34:05 UTC 2006 i686 GNU/Linux

The part at the end here where it says i686 means this is not a 64-bit version of Linux.
Compare the next one:

schnecke:~# uname -a
Linux schnecke.alo.de 2.6.8-16-amd64-schnecke.alo.de #3 Thu Apr 27 11:59:31 CEST 2006 x86_64 GNU/Linux

where it says x86_64 at the end, this is a 64-bit version.

HTH,
Simon.

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello Simon!

About the Memory and Cache...
The infos comes from the S@H page...
Maybe itīs not correct there...


Please, donīt make me worry!

When I look in Konqueror, then I have:
Linux 2.6.16.13-4-default x86_64 (maybe itīs like this, because there is a little space after "default" )
SUSE LINUX 10.1 (x86-64)
The DVD was a "present" in the magazin "cīt specail Linux"...
32 and 64 Bit- full versions ...

And in the installation I became the question: 32 or 64 Bit...?

It gives a special Linux Version for AMDs?

Greetings!

PS. When it will be the 32 Bit LINUX, the special Boinc 64 Bit and the S@H 64 Bit Versions does not run, or?



EDIT:

Linux dhcppc0 2.6.16.13-4-default #1 Wed May 3 04:53:23 UTC 2006 x86_64 x86_64 x 86_64 GNU/Linux


processor       : 0
vendor_id       : AuthenticAMD
cpu family      : 15
model           : 12
model name      : AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3200+
stepping        : 0
cpu MHz         : 2200.000
cache size      : 512 KB (then itīs like this that Windows showed me the double of the real KB?)
fpu             : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level     : 1
wp              : yes
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 syscall nx mmxext lm 3dnowext 3dnow
bogomips        : 4432.29
TLB size        : 1024 4K pages
clflush size    : 64
cache_alignment : 64
address sizes   : 40 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management: ts fid vid ttp

[Simon]

From what you said, it does look like you have 64-bit Linux installed all right

About your second question, no, if you have 32-bit Linux you can not run 64-bit applications.

However - if you have 64-bit Linux, you can run all 32-bit applications if you have the compatibility libraries installed (should be there by default).

Regards,
Simon.

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello!

Again, thanks for your support!



The last time I started Boinc with only:
./boinc -return_results_immediately

For around one hour a WU was uploaded but not reported...

It will be in the future?
Because I started Boinc with "return_results_immediately"...

There is no other command that the uploaded results will be reported "now"?

Greetings!


PS. When I would like to stop Boinc, then I close "only" the console?
When I close Boinc, and some WUs are uploaded but not reported, they will be reported in the next run of Boinc?
Because when I start Boinc I can only stop it. I cannot do for example a Benchmark- run before closing the console...

[Dirk Sadowski]

Hello!

Update: I have my first reported result (completed WU) with Suse LINUX 10.1- 64Bit! (boinc5.4.9seti5.13-linux-x86_64)


I think I had lose my first result to report...

But when I compare it with "Windows SSE2 V5.12 by Crunch3r" itīs 58 minutes slower...
(WU ar=0.393930)
Ohh, I thought, 64 Bit will be so very fast that you cannot follow with your eyes the text on the screen from the completed results...!

How I can do it, to let it run with a minimum of losing performance?
Not with Suse, or yes, but not with KDF, but with only a text- screen?

Greetings!

PS. On the results- overview, I cannot see the name of the app and so on...
Itīs not like with your (Simons) apps...


EDIT:
When I start BOINC only with: ./boinc -return_results_immediately

The uploaded WUs will be reported with the ask for new work...
Not immediately...

So now I think I didnīt lose any WUs...