 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The only thing Windows needs is that in
> the Task Manager you could set the priority of running tasks. It would be
> a question of a few mouse clicks (eg. if there would be a spinbutton or a
> dropdown menu alongside each task in the list).
It's there already (since XP), right click on the process in task manager
and choose "Set Priority". But as already said, this changes the priority
of the whole process. What I assume most people want is the GUI thread to
be fully responsive, and the rendering thread to be on low priority. I
don't see an easy way for the task manager to handle this (unless the
program could "expose" certain threads to the OS that are flagged with names
and then show up in task manager). It seems simpler that the program itself
handles which of its threads can have the priority changed.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tag povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4be7ebe4@news.povray.org...
> Usually it's the responsibility of the operating system to offer the user
> the means to set process priorities. It doesn't make much sense for each
> individual program to have to do that.
>
> Now, I don't know if Windows offers the means for a user to raise or
> lower
> process priorities, but I would be quite surprised if it didn't. (I have
> only
> used XP and not the newer ones, but I must admit I don't remember now if
> there
> was a way to do this in XP. I would guess there is a way to do this in
> Vista
> and Windows7.)
I find the discussion in this thread rather interesting because I wonder now
why there is a Render Priority *button* at all, in POV for Windows.... :-)
well, at least in 3.7, because in 3.6 and earlier I had the definite
impression that it worked just fine...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Yep. Except it's inconvenient in Windows because (a) it has a UI that runs
>> in the same process as the render and (b) one doesn't normally launch it
>> from the command line where setting the priority is trivial.
>
> Why should it be inconvenient?
Because it's roughly six to eight mouse clicks, if you know what you're
doing, to do it with the GUI. I find that inconvenient when it's something
that's likely to be a persistent setting. Especially since it's already
implemented in 3.6 and probably less than a dozen lines of code to carry
over. I honestly can't imagine why one would drop such a feature. (Which may
entirely be simply my lack of imagination.)
> I don't know if any Windows version supports this, but if they don't,
> it's not because it would be hard to implement (at least interface-wise).
It's supported. It's just inconvenient. It also means the UI also runs at
low priority if the render runs at low priority, which in my experience is
also annoying.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Ada - the programming language trying to avoid
you literally shooting yourself in the foot.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Having the render
>> automatically drop into the background when more urgent work(*) starts
>> running is a useful setting.
>
> That's a task for the operating system to do, not the program. All
> modern multitasking operating systems have process priorities (although
> I don't remember if you can actually fine-tune it manually in Windows).
>
> In Unix-type systems you simple start povray with 'nice' (or renice it
> afterwards with 'renice' or with 'top').
>
In Windows, you have 6 prioritys settings that you can sellect:
Real time (don't use that one if you want to do anything), high, higher
than normal, normal, lower than normal and low.
There is also the idle priority, but you can't chose it.
Any application that have the focus will have priority over other
applications that have the same base priority.
Minimised applications have ther priority further reduced, still
relative to applications that have the same base priority.
By default, POV-Ray runs at lower that normal priority.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tDOTdegroot@interdotnlanotherdotnet> wrote:
>> I seem to remember that Render Priority was switched off during
>> developement of the betas. If so, it would be nice if this was switched
>> on again now. Whatever the selection (low, normal, high) the render seems
>> to take up the full 100% cpu.
>
> Btw, I'm curious to know why you wouldn't want POV-Ray taking all the
> available CPU.
Because you want other processes to have priority in getting CPU timeslices.
> The only thing I can think of is if you are suffering from overheating
> problems and you want the CPU to be eg. at 50% at maximum in order for it
> to not to overheat.
Changing the render priority wouldn't help with overheating. That's a
totally different setting (duty cycle, which pauses and resumes render
repeatedly).
> (If what you want is that other tasks get more CPU than POV-Ray, rather
> than the OS distributing the CPU evenly, that's the OS's problem, not
> POV-Ray's. In most modern OS's you can set process priorities on a
> per-process basis.)
POV-Ray's "Render Priority" menu used to tell Windows to change the process
priority. That's all it did.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Reducing the number of cores is really only equivalent if you can do
> this in the middle of a trace, which I don't think is currently
> possible.
Maybe I'm missing the point, but can't you just stop the render, change
the number of cores, append "+c" to the command line and continue
happily? I just tried it, and it seemed to work...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In Windows there is a possibility to set affinity.
See this tip :
http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/how-to-set-processor-affinity-to-an-application-in-windows/
You can choose the processors to use per program. On a quad-cpu system, you can
for example set POVRay on processor 1,2,3 and still have an entire processor for
your other programs.
I don't know if this will be implemented in the final POVRay 3.7 but duty cycle
was also useful.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> In Windows there is a possibility to set affinity.
>
> See this tip :
>
http://www.addictivetips.com/windows-tips/how-to-set-processor-affinity-to-an-application-in-windows/
>
> You can choose the processors to use per program. On a quad-cpu system, you can
> for example set POVRay on processor 1,2,3 and still have an entire processor for
> your other programs.
>
> I don't know if this will be implemented in the final POVRay 3.7 but duty cycle
> was also useful.
>
>
Duty cicle was implemented to protect a computer in the space shuttle.
POV-Ray's priority on a windows system is set to "lower than normal".
It's the task of the OS to attribute CPU cycles. On a quad core, using
POV-Ray should not affect any application that have the focus and that
start with "Normal" priority increased by the fact that it have the
focus. If it causes a problem, you should complain to Microsoft so that
they correct the problem.
There is also the possibility that your systen is set to prioritize
background tasks.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertyorg> schreef in bericht
news:4bf878b3$1@news.povray.org...
>
> POV-Ray's priority on a windows system is set to "lower than normal". It's
> the task of the OS to attribute CPU cycles. On a quad core, using POV-Ray
> should not affect any application that have the focus and that start with
> "Normal" priority increased by the fact that it have the focus. If it
> causes a problem, you should complain to Microsoft so that they correct
> the problem.
>
> There is also the possibility that your systen is set to prioritize
> background tasks.
>
I confess I start to get confused now with the many - sometimes
contradictory - posts in this thread.
My experience, with POV-Ray 3.7 on a dual core XP machine, with priority set
to "lower than normal", is that both cores take up the full 100% cpu during
render, slowing down all other applications having the focus during that
time. Again, I repeat myself, I seem to remember that Priority was disabled
during beta development, but I have had no confirmation of that until now.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> My experience, with POV-Ray 3.7 on a dual core XP machine, with priority
> set to "lower than normal", is that both cores take up the full 100% cpu
> during render, slowing down all other applications having the focus during
> that time. Again, I repeat myself, I seem to remember that Priority was
> disabled during beta development, but I have had no confirmation of that
> until now.
Getting 100% CPU usage is expected. But you shouldn't be getting any
slowdown.
Processes with low priority get all the CPU timeslices that aren't being
used by a process with higher priority. As soon as an app in normal priority
tries to use the CPU, POV-Ray will use less of it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
