Process will not work with 2 Watchdog processes

[mdexter]

Hi folks,

First post here, ok I just want to say that this is the most important software on my PC for so many reasons.  I run a decent system and do everything from HD Gameplay to Video Producing, High end Photographic work etc etc, I run a Hex Core with 32gb of Ram, Dual GPU etc etc and this software has by far been the best to allow the max out of all that I run, so I commend you guys in the first instance first.

Ok the one program I have on my entire PC that will BSOD my PC is Cyberlink Power Director 12 when its producing the final movie. I run Core Parking with all Cores unparked to utilize 100% of those cores, so when Powerdirector is rendering a movie it will BSOD the program, 6 Cores and 6 Threads working there butts off, see screenshot called didnt-change.jpg whereby the watchdog process did not change, once those cores etc reach around 50% usage it will bsod at some point in the rendering.

OK I am not going to compromise my entire system based on one program so I though the obvious way around this was to set a watchdog rule for pdr12.exe to drop the affinity to cores 4,6,8,10 so 4 actual cores only in 100% use, seems to work fine and PC does not BSOD, once the processor reaches above 30% usage it will change the affinity.

Ok the issue that I am having and I have tested it extensively is that it will not revert back to my second rule, which is once the processor drops below 29% of CPU usage the affinities are reverted back to all affinities, all 6 cores and 6 threads, this does not happen, they stay on the 4,6,8,10 and this bogs it down for the editing process where I need every bit of juice for that, sometimes too the process does not change and all cores stay working which will BSOD my PC, I have studied this and have come to the conclusion that it is hit and miss.

So guys I ask if you could help me to get the rules working to go to 4,6,8,10 and then to revert back to all affinities that would be awesome, I have attached the config file line for both rules below.

WatchdogRules2=pdr12.exe;2;0;30;3000;1360;0;1;-;-;-;-,PDR12.exe;6;0;29;3000;0;0;2;-;-;-;-

Please see the screenshots as well, many thanks in advance guys

Cheers Mat

[BenYeeHua]

I am not using the watchdog, so sorry for not helping it.

Ok the one program I have on my entire PC that will BSOD my PC is Cyberlink Power Director 12 when its producing the final movie. I run Core Parking with all Cores unparked to utilize 100% of those cores, so when Powerdirector is rendering a movie it will BSOD the program, 6 Cores and 6 Threads working there butts off, see screenshot called didnt-change.jpg whereby the watchdog process did not change, once those cores etc reach around 50% usage it will bsod at some point in the rendering.

This sound like you has overclocked your CPU?
What happen if you are testing with Intel LINPACK and IntelBurnTest etc?

It look like you has too less voltage and causing the CPU to crash, when some software is using AVX to stress your CPU.

[mdexter]

Yep VERY Overclocked, but I don't want to increase my voltage too much more as its on the limits for this profile, I would rather have the watchdog process available to use here, thanks mate

[BenYeeHua]

So the issues is, you has set 2 difference watchdog for >30% and <29% CPU and both of them don't apply sometimes?
I think it can be the watchdog design issues, which only allow one of them to apply to the same process, and it should be a bug, I guess.
----
Just a question, why you don't want to use ProBalance?
Because you don't wanna apply to other process too? Or the CPU usage?

Anyways, did you try exclude it from ProBalance restraint? But I guess it should not affected this issues.

[edkiefer]

Are you getting WHEA errors in event viewer ?

What CPU is that your running ?

[mdexter]

Dont use Pro Balance restraint no....

Ok just wondering why the Overclock is relevant here, I run a 4930k and I get 124 BSODS same BSOD all the time and it relates to voltage only and no I am not going to increase the voltage.  Ok back to the thread can you guys help in terms of the two options for the program to make the program allow it to run please, thanks all.

[edkiefer]

I don't know on watchdog , never tried anything close to that , wait for support .

But yes, that is voltage issue, what also you could do is use XTU were you can set app profiles to OC .

So you have a low OC for xx app , cause its not stable at your higher OC . It changes OC per app .

Thats only recommendation i can make

[mdexter]

I don't know on watchdog , never tried anything close to that , wait for support .

But yes, that is voltage issue, what also you could do is use XTU were you can set app profiles to OC .

So you have a low OC for xx aoo , cause its not stable at your higher OC . It changes OC per app .

Thats only recommendation i can make

Thanks for your help, I already have a low med and high, this is high again I am not going to increase voltage anymore, ill wait to find a solution to the watchdog process, thanks again

[DeadHead]

I wonder if the order you set your rules have anything to do with this? What happens if you swap the order around?

Also, what happens you choose a greater difference than only 1%, for example 35% and 25%, any difference?

[mdexter]

I wonder if the order you set your rules have anything to do with this? What happens if you swap the order around?

Also, what happens you choose a greater difference than only 1%, for example 35% and 25%, any difference?

Hey Dead, I will give this a try mate, many thanks and I'll post back findings

[mdexter]

No good, it does not revert back to the other settings, I am thinking that the watchdog process only allows for one rule per .exe, would be great to see this change so I can set multiple rules for this app as it means a lot to be able to do this, hope the dev can get back to me ASAP, cheers guys

[Jeremy Collake]

I am investigating this. I will have more information soon.

[mdexter]

I am investigating this. I will have more information soon.

Awesome news, looking forward to your findings for multiple rules on one .exe, again thanks very much guys

[Jeremy Collake]

You are correct, secondary rules for the same process are being wiped out at the config level.

I am going to issue a fix in v7.0.1.7 beta, which I'll upload in a few hours/day (as soon as it's done).

Thank you for reporting this!

[mdexter]

You are correct, secondary rules for the same process are being wiped out at the config level. In some cases like this, they can appear to be 'merged' even.

I am going to issue a fix in v7.0.1.7 beta, which I'll upload in a few hours/day (as soon as it's done).

Thank you for reporting this!

No, thank you very much for actually looking into this so soon and creating a fix, that's amazing and I really appreciate this very much, this will allow so many processes be far more dynamic than anything else on the market and that's leading the way, your software is the very first thing I install because it makes my experience amazing.

One more thing I suggest which will blow anything else away in terms of optimum process tuning would be the following for example: (this example below can be used for any amount of consumer choices for optimizing certain programs)

I record Video's of PC HD Gameplay, to do this I require a few programs to run in real time and they are all crucial to work without lag simultaneously.

1.  Load up A.exe (PC Game - all affinities and high settings for priority class, i/o priority,memory priority normal % exclude from pro balance restraint)

2. Load  B.exe (Recording GAME software  - all affinities and high settings for priority class, i/o priority,memory priority normal % exclude from pro balance restraint)

3. Load C.exe (Webcam Recording Software  - all affinities and high settings for priority class, i/o priority,memory priority normal % exclude from pro balance restraint)

So if items A.exe, B.exe & C.exe had there selected settings and you had a profile options I could add these to the profile called "Game A.exe"

Whenever Game A.exe items were loaded a master action or watchdog rule could override all other processes and I could make all other processes have a watchdog rule, for example all other processes are on below normal priority, affinity 0,1,2 & 3 etc etc, you get my gist.

This way any profile loaded could have superior priority over all other processes, just my 2 cents worth.

In any case thanks so very much for your update and resolve to this initial scenario, regards Mat 'inspectagame'

[Jeremy Collake]

I agree, this will be an important fix.

I'm almost there on the new build. Just a few more things to wrap up with this and some other chores. It won't be long for sure.

I've long considered profiles to group settings together, for use in scenarios like you describe. Certainly I'll work towards that. I agree this is important functionality that many advanced users will appreciate.

I appreciate your patronage.

[Jeremy Collake]

While you patiently wait for me to release this next beta, I do have a work-around for you.

If you use a slightly different matching base name for the second rule, you can make it work.

For instance:

Rule1: pdr12.exe
Rule2: pdr1?.exe

[Jeremy Collake]

Process Lasso v7.0.1.7 beta is building now. It will be up in about 30 minutes.

This build fixes this watchdong configuration issue reported here. Thank you again for reporting it!

The bug would only manifest when the secondary rule matched a prior rule in both name and action.

I continue to test the watchdog to make sure everything is kosher.

[mdexter]

Process Lasso v7.0.1.7 beta is building now. It will be up in about 30 minutes.

This build fixes this watchdong configuration issue reported here. Thank you again for reporting it!

The bug would only manifest when the secondary rule matched a prior rule in both name and action.

I continue to test the watchdog to make sure everything is kosher.

Ohhh perfect, I will give this a try and thanks very much again, I am sure the fix will work as you have suggested and again thank very much for your amazing support, to be commended

[Jeremy Collake]

I believe a secondary fix is needed before those watchdog rules will function right.

It's a core adjustment to the watchdog system.

I am going to be working on this in this next beta series, first build coming shortly.

I will get there, and it'll do what you want w/o complications -- soon.

[mdexter]

I believe a secondary fix is needed before those watchdog rules will function right.

It's a core adjustment to the watchdog system.

I am going to be working on this in this next beta series, first build coming shortly.

I will get there, and it'll do what you want w/o complications -- soon.

Hi Jeremy, very powerful opportunities with this thank you.

Again was thinking about my secondary request, I just thought of another possibility in regards to having say 5 processes running one power profile and then everything else drops to another power profile whilst those 5 processes are running, basically again without rehashing, 5 processes running at full speed disabled core parking etc and then every other process on the OS drops to minimum or idle even for the purposes of squeezing every ounce of CPU etc to recording.  I record HD gameplay at 60 FPS uncompressed AVI and an MP4 webcam file and the Game.exe, so yeah just a way to have A, B and C.exe under a High performance profile and then everything else on the PC drops to nothing, thanks again Jeremy for your awesome support.

[Jeremy Collake]

It wouldn't be ideal to set everything else to a lower priority. It's best to keep everything running at Normal (or their developer's intended priority class), and make changes only when necessary - conservative and cautious. I will think on this more and maybe have more feedback though; perhaps there are a few things we could do to ensure that set of processes takes precedence over all others w/o causing problems.

Combining groups of actions into profiles is definitely something I'm working towards. I may end up refactoring the watchdog system in it's entirety, and that will allow all sorts of new possibilities. Stay tuned for this. While working on this issue, I've discovered that the existing design isn't ideal for many scenarios.

[Jeremy Collake]

I am issuing a new beta v7.0.1.7 in a few minutes.

This build may be the first where the rules you've got set here actually work correctly. In prior builds, they'd only be applied once per instance of the target process(es).

Development in on-going though.

[BenYeeHua]

Yup, I will said that you should try use the Hardware H.264 encode on the Intel, AMD or Nvidia at the max bitrate, it should be the nearly same quality as uncompressed video, while greatly reducing the CPU usage and I/O load on the RAM.
---
But ya, the best solution is still using another computer for capture and recording only, so your will always get no affect on the gaming and recording performance.

[mdexter]

Yup, I will said that you should try use the Hardware H.264 encode on the Intel, AMD or Nvidia at the max bitrate, it should be the nearly same quality as uncompressed video, while greatly reducing the CPU usage and I/O load on the RAM.
---
But ya, the best solution is still using another computer for capture and recording only, so your will always get no affect on the gaming and recording performance.

Thanks Ben, NO the machine can easily handle Recording Gameplay and Webcam whilst operating the game with 0 Lag, you can see an example here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjSnlhLIeyg  but its all about getting more out of the system and this program has the potential to do it, thanks again Ben

[Jeremy Collake]

I have been testing the current beta series and can say that the new final I'm about to release, v7.0.4, will absolutely properly handle these rules. Version 7.0.2 fixed the UI issue, but I then discovered that each rule would have only been applied once. So, finally, I think you will have what you need. If you find that to NOT be the case, please do let me know - don't spare my feelings, this is business, and I certainly need to know if something doesn't work. There are so many features that it's difficult for me to test them all, something I've taken new actions to address.

[mdexter]

I have been testing the current beta series and can say that the new final I'm about to release, v7.0.4, will absolutely properly handle these rules. Version 7.0.2 fixed the UI issue, but I then discovered that each rule would have only been applied once. So, finally, I think you will have what you need. If you find that to NOT be the case, please do let me know - don't spare my feelings, this is business, and I certainly need to know if something doesn't work. There are so many features that it's difficult for me to test them all, something I've taken new actions to address.

Hi Jeremy, no you have been awesome in your support, and thanks so very much, your software is the Catalyst for machines having so much more potential for seamless workflows hence why I have built my machine to handle very intensive tasks, these operations will only make it possible, thank you so very much Jeremy, hopefully you may be able to setup one day a setting for a power profile for certain .exe's and then all other processes running with certain rules, that would be the ultimate, but in any case Jeremy thanks again very much