BOINC on a domain controller

[Fardringle]

Is there any way to install and run a BOINC version newer than 5.10.45 on a Windows domain controller running Server 2012 R2? The info I've found online so far says no, and the standard installation process with a couple of version 6 and 7 clients I tried got errors and wouldn't install. It works OK with 5.10.45 on projects that allow the older client, but I switch between projects on a regular basis and I'd really like to get this 12 CPU beast able to work on projects that require the newer BOINC versions.

 

[waffleironhead]

Can you do a fresh install of it on a non DC, then copy the associated files and registry keys over?
Probably need to create the boinc users as well. From what I've read, the installer is the problem, not boinc itself.
IDK, it's been a long time since I've messed around with windows server.

 

[VirtualLarry]

If in a corporate setting, sounds like a security risk. If in a home setting, why not run it in a VM?

 

[Fardringle]

As I understand it, the problem is that the newer BOINC clients want to use a local user account for the service and the domain controller only uses global/domain user accounts, so just copying the files doesn't work (I tried it).

It's not really a security risk, since it's a small office that I fully administer and just want to keep all of those cores doing something instead of sitting there doing nothing at all except acting as a glorified file server. Unfortunately, running in a VM would let me use newer BOINC clients but could potentially cause problems if the server ever actually needs the CPU power and can't have it because BOINC in the VM won't know that it's supposed to go idle/suspended.

It does work fine with the 5.10.45 client on the projects that support the older client. I just thought I'd ask to see if anyone knows of a way to make the 7.x client work. If not, I'll stick with 5.10.45 and let the server work on those projects even when they aren't my primary focus at the time.

 

[GLeeM]

As I understand it, the problem is that the newer BOINC clients want to use a local user account for the service

If you do not run BOINC as a service does it still want a local user account? (I guess I never understood the advantages of running as a service)

 

[Fardringle]

The main reason to run it as a service is that BOINC will still run even if a user is not actively logged in to the computer (good for a server), and also so it can run without having the BOINC Manager running in the system tray (good for desktop PCs that actually get used by curious people who like to break things). The main disadvantage of running as a service is that BOINC can't run GPU projects, but none of my office machines have GPUs worth mentioning so running as a service seems to be the best option for them.

To answer the first part of the question, I'm not sure. I want it to run as a service, but I might remove the client and try to reinstall the new version as a normal program instead of a service just to see if it works..

 

[networkman]

The advantage of running a VM is that you can choose how much proc/ram/disk to allocate to the VM, so just allocate say 2 procs, some ram and disk and see how that goes; if all goes well, you can allocate more as you review the host server's performance logs. Getting some BOINC time even if limited below 12 is still far better than none at all.

 

[Fardringle]

That's true, but getting ALL of it is better than some.

I'd rather run the old client on all 12 CPUs for a limited number of projects instead of in a VM with a bigger list of projects but only a few CPU cores available..

 

[Bradtech519]

I wouldn't run it on a DC personally. There's still a remote possibility of something security wise occurring and you taking the blame. I don't crunch on any of my work stuff out of paranoia. I wish I could break in new blade centers fulled populated though . I'd recommend like others maybe using a VM and isolating your LDAP/AD environment even though I don't think boinc poses a big threat. I'd hate for some outside contractor or someone to glance by and see it & you get in trouble is all I'm worried about.

 

[Fardringle]

Getting in trouble is not a problem. It's MY network and nobody ever touches the server except me.

Security risks are a small concern, so I only run well established apps on the idle office machines (no beta/small/new projects at all) and I might do a VM just for better security but it hurts to think that some of those beautiful cores wouldn't be put to proper use...

On a side note, the Xeon E5 CPUs are pretty impressive. This server is a Dell T320 with a Xeon E5-2430L processor and under max load on all 12 cores it only draws 89 watts of total power from the wall (and 35-40 watts when mostly idle). That's a far cry from the old dual Xeon P3-933 I used to have that turned the whole 6x10 server room/wiring closet into a sauna at times even with a dedicated AC unit.

 

[Bradtech519]

Getting in trouble is not a problem. It's MY network and nobody ever touches the server except me.

Security risks are a small concern, so I only run well established apps on the idle office machines (no beta/small/new projects at all) and I might do a VM just for better security but it hurts to think that some of those beautiful cores wouldn't be put to proper use...

On a side note, the Xeon E5 CPUs are pretty impressive. This server is a Dell T320 with a Xeon E5-2430L processor and under max load on all 12 cores it only draws 89 watts of total power from the wall (and 35-40 watts when mostly idle). That's a far cry from the old dual Xeon P3-933 I used to have that turned the whole 6x10 server room/wiring closet into a sauna at times even with a dedicated AC unit.

I've used quite a few T320's out in the field to replace aging servers from 2007-2008.

 

[Fardringle]

I just realized that I never updated this thread. I ended up removing BOINC 5.10.45 from the server and have version 7.4.42 installed as a 'standard' installation with no service and no screensaver. I really would prefer to have it run as a service so it can run when no active user is logged in to the server, but there are too many projects I want to run that won't work with the old client so I decided to compromise and leave a user logged in just for running BOINC and switch to an admin user when I actually need to do any administration duties on the server.

 

[Fullmetal Chocobo]

And how is it working out so far? Any hiccups with crunching or service interruptions on the "work" side?

 

[Fardringle]

No problems that I've seen so far, but I don't run any small/test projects on the server so there may be problems with some of those that I just haven't seen. But for big projects like SETI, Leiden, WCG, etc. it has been working just fine. Zero effect on end user access to the server, either, but this server really is just a glorified file server that also manages the domain user logins for the 20-ish people in the office. It could probably handle everything the office ever needs with just one of the 12 CPU cores in the machine..

 

[waffleironhead]

Bump for boinc update.
Apparently now compatible with domain controllers.
https://boinc.berkeley.edu/wiki/Rel...NC_7.6_now_compatible_with_Domain_Controllers

EDIT: looks like a service install is not allowed though.