Uhhm...
I'd say there's something wrong there...
First of all, let me state that seti@home, even if it consumes all available
CPU, isn't neccessarily a drag on the system. I run 2 seti@homes myself on a
dual celeron (because one wouldn't grab all available CPU-time since it's not
written multithreaded) and I don't even feel it. That's because seti plays nice
to other apps.
However, if you have a slow computer, it might tie up the processor too much,
giving you a somewhat sluggish response. So in fact it depends on what computer
you're using.
But... The stuff that worries me is: "seti@home is taking up about 27% of my
CPU"... Seti takes all the CPU it can get, meaning that there's only 27% free
for seti to grab.
Where's the other 73% going into? I think _that_ should be your main concern,
and not the seti@home app. If you can eliminate something in the 73%
CPU-consumption slice, drastically cutting that one down, and your PC is still
slow, try loosing seti@home.
ps: to make sure seti plays as nice as possible to other apps, start it with the
"-nice 19" option. The highter the number of "niceness", the nicer it'll play to
other apps. "Niceness" can range from -20 (maximum priority) to 19 (real nice to
other apps).
On Mar 27 Mike Fieschko wrote:
> >>> "HAL" == HAL 9000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> HAL> nope, not one instance of httpd.... seti@home is taking up
> HAL> about 27% of my CPU... would that greatly affect the
> HAL> performance??
>
> Hello, HAL.
>
> Yes.
>
> (Why is _HAL_ running seti@home, anyway ? ;-) )
>
>
--
Rial Juan <http://nighty.ulyssis.org>
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Belgium tel: (++32) 89/856533
ulyssis system admininstrator <http://www.ulyssis.org>
The little critters in nature; they don't know they're ugly.
That's very funny... A fly marying a bumble-bee...
------------------------------------------------------------
Sign the petition at http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
Help bring us more Linux Drivers
